World of Ham Radio 1994 January/AMSOFT_1994.iso/packet/docs/pd198911.doc

Text File | 1993-12-31 | 385.5 KB | 6,531 lines

Wed,  1 Nov 89       Volume 89 : Issue 225Today's Topics:     A
follow-up to packetRADIOs using automatic power adjustment
          Cambridge.Z88/Heathkit.Pocket.Packet
Gateway - 20-Oct-89 [ACK-ACK protocol]
 latest BM.EXE?                  Looking for info on CONVERSE
node                          Neophyte questions
New tcp/ip user in the Portland, Or. area
ROSES-1 Packet Forum Schedule                             Telnet
PADs    using directional antennas to reduce hidden transmitter
effect                 XOBBS problem in Microport and
Xenix------------------------------------------------------------
----------Date: 31 Oct 89 20:26:55 GMTFrom:
philmtl!philabs!briar.philips.com![e-mail]  (Robert
Casey;6282;3.57;$0201)Subject: A follow-up to packetRADIOs using
automatic power adjustmentPacketradio power output control.some
thoughts on a possible algorithm for automatic power level
adjustment fora packetradio.  At least on VHF and UHF.1: Station
A would initiate connection, using full power.2: Station B would
measure station A's signal strength (like an S meter), andtell A
that it can reduce so-many dB its power, when B confirms
theconnection.  Station B uses full power.3: Station A would
measure station B's signal strength, and tell B that it
canreduce its power by so-many dB. A uses reduced power at this
point.4: Both stations are now operating at reduced power.
Conditions can change,so if A finds that it tells B to re-try a
lot, A will tell B to increase powersome (maybe by one step of
attenuation, like 1 or 2 dB).I suppose that the radios could
store the power values used for commonlycontacted stations, so
one could initiate contacts with less than full power.Also, the
radio recievers would need some sort of calabration as to
whatrecieved signal strength is needed for an acceptable
connection.  Like "S-3 isthe lowest level I can reliabily use".
Unless one can measure bit error rateseasily instead of S units
(signal strength), in which case one could set anacceptable BER
and adjust power untill you get that BER.  Then you could
avoidtying up too much area ofa channel.As someone mentioned,
this idea could make worse the hidden transmitterproblem.  But
you could avoid having two big-mouth stations next door to
eachother from tying up a large area of a channel.  I don't know
how to decidethis question (not being an expert).I think there
are some uusused bits in the packet headers that could be
usedfor a purpose like this.  If not, (or we want to save them
for a better use)I suppose that special codes could be made up
for this.  (I'm NOT a packetgruru!  I'm more of a hardware
analog hacker than a software type, anyway).73 de
WA2ISE------------------------------Date: 31 Oct 89 14:40:52
GMTFrom: n.sp.cs.cmu.edu![e-mail]  (Thomas
Warfel)Subject: Cambridge.Z88/Heathkit.Pocket.PacketHas anyone
successful hooked up a Cambridge Z88 to Heath's"Pocket Packet"
TNC, and if so, what cable pinout/communicationsparameters did
you use? -Tom------------------------------Date: 30 Oct 89
20:28:18 GMTFrom: [e-mail]  (Patty Winter)Subject:
Gateway - 20-Oct-89 [ACK-ACK protocol]>
 TCP/IP HF EXPERIMENT>  For starters, Phil Karn, KA9Q, and Brian
Lloyd, WB6RQN, have>shown in their paper "Link Level Protocols
Revisited," that regardless of>link quality, maximum channel
efficiency is realized when a stop-and-wait>ARQ protocol is
used.  >>In their paper, Karn and Lloyd also advocate the use of
a connectionless>ACK-ACK link level protocol to improve the
efficiency of noisy channels ^^^^^^^Better known as the "Bill
the Cat" protocol.:-) :-)Patty--
*****************************************************************
************ Patty Winter N6BIS                        INTERNET:
[e-mail]: [44.4.0.44]                     UUCP:
{decwrl,nsc,sun}!apple!winter************************************
*****************************************
------------------------------Date: 30 Oct 89 15:19:07 GMTFrom:
cs.utexas.edu!mailrus!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!watmath!ria!u
wovax![e-mail]: latest
BM.EXE?What is the lastest copy of BM.EXE?  I have a version
from 88.  Is therea site that keeps the lastest bits of this
code?  Can you have asignature file with
BM?------------------------------Date: 31 Oct 89 19:45:11
GMTFrom: crash!orbit!pnet51![e-mail]  (Chris
Elmquist)Subject: Looking for info on CONVERSE nodeAwhile back I
remember reading about a ROM for TNCs for software for a PCthat
implemented a conversation function between multiple AX.25
sessionson a channel  (ie, round-table type QSO's)....  Anybody
have the scoopon this?  We could use something like this here in
 MSP where everyone istrying to do keyboard to keyboard sessions
with everyone else...Any info would be appreciated.  Thanks and
73,  ChrisNAME: Chris Elmquist, St. Paul, MNUUCP:
{amdahl!bungia, uunet!rosevax, chinet,
killer}!orbit!pnet51!elmquistINET: [e-mail]:
N0JCF @ WB0GDB------------------------------Date: 30 Oct 89
18:07:39 GMTFrom: hpl-opus!hpnmdla![e-mail]  (Glenn
Elmore)Subject: Neophyte questions  My mistake. A much better
consideration would be tosubsribe and support newsletters like
the New England TCPer8 Denfeld DrWestboro, MA 01581   I think
subscription is about $12/year and it is a great forumfor TCP/IP
information exchange and support.73Glenn Elmore
N6GN------------------------------Date: 30 Oct 89 17:15:01
GMTFrom: hp-pcd!hpcvca!hpcvck![e-mail]  (Minor
Cross)Subject: New tcp/ip user in the Portland, Or. areaHi
Johan,You need to contact Ron WA7TAS in Corvallis.  He is the
coordinator forgetting an TCP/IP address.  Try him on the 146.78
rptr.  I will see himat work, and will let him know that you are
looking for him.Insert Standard Disclaimer notice here:
 ___      /  /        Minor Cross     KD7YJ     /  /
Hewlett-Packard  Northwest IC Division  [ NID ]    /  /_____
   _________       1020 NE Circle Blvd.       /  ___   /  ____
 /  ___   /     Corvallis, OR   97330      /  /  /  /  /___/   /
 /__/  /       -------------------------     /__/  /__/
/  ______/       AT&T:  [phone]                        /
/           HP telnet  750-2044               /__/
}inhp4!hplabs!hp-pcd!hpcvca!hpcvck!mcross------------------------
------Date: 30 Oct 89 14:32:39 GMTFrom:
att!cbnewsh![e-mail]
(j.gordon.beattie)Subject: ROSES-1 Packet Forum ScheduleTO:
ALL@ALLBBSFROM:N2DSY@KD6THBID: $1028_ROSESSUBJECT: ROSES-1 Event
Schedule             The Radio Amateur Telecommunications
Society            The RATS Opens Systems Environment Symposium
                       11 November 1989
ROSES-1 Schedule of Events                        As of 28
October 1989ROSES-1 will be held on the 11th of November 1989 in
the StudentCenter of the New Jersey Institute of Technology from
8AM to6PM.  Talk-in will be on 145.19 (-600) and 147.225 (+600)
MHz.For further information contact Gordon Beattie, N2DSY
at201-387-8896 or via packet [e-mail] event will include
talks for the new and experienced operator.All software
discussed at the sessions will be available for free.(plus cost
of media - so bring 5-1/4 or 3-1/2 inch disks)Also: Question and
Answer Sessions,       Demonstrations,       TNC Tune-up (bring
TNC and radio)      Equipment Literature,      Software
Distribution,      License Examinations.NOTE: ALL Sessions
include a Question and Answer period. Plan on dinner with your
fellow operators!For further information contact:General: Gordon
Beattie, N2DSY  201-387-8896  n2dsy@kd6thTesting: Pete Adley,
K2MHP      201-796-6622The tentative schedule follows:
Activity 1               Activity 2
----------------------------------------------------------------0
8:00    Coffee, Tea,             License Exams         Doughnuts
                  Start
*09:00    Introductions,                *         Announcements
               *                                       *09:15
How to Set Up a               *         Packet Station
     *                                       *10:00    Operating
a Personal          *         Mailbox                       *
                                   *11:00    Networking with the
         End         ROSE X.25 Switch12:00    Frequency
Coordination         Forum12:30    Announcements
<------------- Lunch ------------->
Available in Cafeteria13:00    ROSErver/Packet          Packet
for the Blind         Radio Mailbox            Voice Synthesizer
Demo             System User Forum             *14:00    Open
Systems Mail,       ROSErver/PRMBS Demonstration
Directory and                 *               Network Management
           *         Forum                         *15:00
Break,                   ROSE X.25 Switch Demonstration
Announcements                 *
     *15:15    Broadcast File                *
Distribution                  *         and Roundtables
     *         via Packet                    *         16:00
User Forum               ROSErver and ROSE X.25 Switch
Open Q&A                 Switch Sysops Meeting         for All!
               All Welcome!
 *16:30    Informal Discussions,         *         Demos Before
                *         Dinner at the Diner           *Let us
know if you're planning to attend by sending a packet message
toN2DSY@KD6TH.73, and see you at ROSES-1
!------------------------------Date: 29 Oct 89 20:47:10 GMTFrom:
pacbell!noe![e-mail]  (Marc de Groot)Subject:
Telnet PADsWell, what does it take to put a telnet PAD in TAPR
TNC-2 EPROMS?  Is thereany code in the public for running the
Z80 support chips in the littlemonster?  How little/how much of
the KA9Q package needs to go in there?While I'm raving, has
anyone written a Forth interpreter that can runon a TNC-2?  If
so, it should take a couple of weeks to get a PAD running.Has
anyone published an article or app note on programming the
TNC-2?Twisty little passages in my enquiring mind want to
know.-- Marc de Groot (KG6KF)                   These ARE my
employer's opinions!Noe Systems, San FranciscoUUCP:
uunet!hoptoad!noe!marcInternet:
[e-mail]------------------------------Date: 31 Oct 89
20:23:16 GMTFrom:
philmtl!philabs!briar.philips.com![e-mail]  (Robert
Casey;6282;3.57;$0201)Subject: using directional antennas to
reduce hidden transmitter effectUsers using directional antenna
to reduce "hidden transmitter" problems.All you packet grurus
would have to tell me if this actually would makesense, but a
packet user who uses only one PBBS could use a
somewhatdirectional antenna that would distribute his signal
over the PBBS'sservice area, and no signal outside that area.
All other users wouldhear him, and not transmit.  And he
wouldn't transmit a collision withanother user on the far side
of the service area.  And he would be less likelyto interfere
withsome other user outside of the areatrying to use a nearby
PBBS in a neighboring area.      *   +                 *+      *
+    *   +         *+   U +*     * y +    U * a +       *+y  b
+* a     *   + b   *  x +       *+       +* x        *   +  *  +
            *+  +*           *   +=fringe of Users signal
coverage (directional)*=fringe of PBBS signal coverage
(omni-directional)y=another user in the PBBS area (assume
similar patterns of coverage as U,omni-directiona in left
diagram, and directional in right)x=another user outside of the
PBBS areaa=another PBBS outside of the first PBBS areaOf course,
getting most users to install an appropriate directional
antennawould not be easy.73 de
WA2ISE------------------------------Date: 30 Oct 89 04:35:09
GMTFrom: cadre.dsl.pitt.edu!pitt!w2xo![e-mail]  (Jim
Durham)Subject: XOBBS problem in Microport and
[e-mail] writes:> The problem with msgget in both
XENIX (r) and Microport is much simpler> than most of us may
think: the XO hook file appears to have been debugged> on a
32-bit machine (if it ever worked), and the author forgot to
declare> ANY longs that are needed.  The msg key (first
parameter) needs to be long,Pete, you are absolutely right about
the first argument to msgget(). Iwas *convinced* it was an int
(it's actually type key_t, which I thoughtwas an int, but, low
and behold, it is a *long*. The easiest fix forthis is to merely
append an 'l' or 'L' to the character constantsin ax_mbx.h.Yes,
it *does* work and has been for the last six months on myMC68010
Convergent Miniframe(which is a 16 bitter!).> and I remember a
few other places (but not exactly where) where either> %l.. or
(long) needed to be.  The other authors in "net" have generally>
been careful of this.> Uh, like where? The only longs that live
anywhere in ax_mbx.c arethe message types, and these are all
cast to long where needed. I lookedthrough  the code and can't
see anything obvious. Unfortunately, I don'thave access to a
Xenix or Microport system to see what happens. I wouldappreciate
if you or someone who does have such a system would give mesome
specifics.> I used:> long msgkey = *(long *)" BBS";> with
msgkey, msgkey+1, msgkey+2, msgkey+3 for the keys for the 4
queues.> OK, I see, pretty neat.Incidentally, there are *many*
bug fixes since the code that was distributed at Dayton with the
.1 version of 'net'. I will put thelatest bbs code out on
cs.pitt.edu in the ftp/pub/ka9q directory as'xobbs.shar.Z' . 73
and thanks Pete,Jim, W2XO   (w2xo![e-mail])  (packet:
W2XO @ W2XO)------------------------------End of PACKET-RADIO
Digest V89 Issue #225*****************************************
4-Nov-89 00:32:42-MST,12277;000000000000Return-Path:
<[e-mail]>Date: Sat,  4 Nov
89 00:24:43 MSTFrom:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: PACKET-RADIO Digest
V89 #226To: [e-mail]-RADIO
Digest         Sat,  4 Nov 89       Volume 89 : Issue 226Today's
Topics:     A follow-up to packetRADIOs using automatic power
adjustment                 Cambridge.Z88/Heathkit.Pocket.Packet
                      Docs for KA9Q NET.EXE?
   Need Unix NOS (2 msgs)                  Using an Alinco
DR-110T for Packet                          xfer at > 1200 bps
              XOBBS problem in Microport and
Xenix------------------------------------------------------------
----------Date: 2 Nov 89 13:51:47 GMTFrom:
shlump.nac.dec.com!ryn.esg.dec.com!pstjtt.enet.dec.com!taber@decu
ac.dec.comSubject: A follow-up to packetRADIOs using automatic
power adjustmentIn article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (Robert Casey;6282;3.57;$0201)
writes...>4: Both stations are now operating at reduced power.
Conditions can change,>so if A finds that it tells B to re-try a
lot, A will tell B to increase power>some (maybe by one step of
attenuation, like 1 or 2 dB).> It would probably be better to
have the station that is re-trying go to full power and then
re-negotiate the power setting.  This could savejunk packets
being sent out while "hunting" for the right power level.This
probably implies that it would be better to have the power
settingdone with new transaction types rather than added to
connect/ack messages.  Maybe it would be useful to have a bit in
connect that meansthe station is capable of negotiating the
power level though.> >As someone mentioned, this idea could make
worse the hidden transmitter>problem.  But you could avoid
having two big-mouth stations next door to each>other from tying
up a large area of a channel.  I don't know how to decide>this
question (not being an expert).> I don't think there is a
"solution" to hidden transmitters.  Even with directional
antennae, you have the problem of stepping on someone who is in
your null.  In the end, it might be better to listen on a
non-driectional antenna with a preamp and transmit on a
directional antenna with "appropriate power."  (This as we move
toward full-duplex, self contained packet stations.)  Even then,
there are scenarios where there will be hidden transmitters.
             >>>==>PStJTT            Patrick St. Joseph Teahan TaberMail
address:  ahhhhh, you don't want to send me
mail....------------------------------Date: 1 Nov 89 04:46:37
GMTFrom: n.sp.cs.cmu.edu![e-mail]  (Thomas
Warfel)Subject: Cambridge.Z88/Heathkit.Pocket.PacketThanks to
all who responded.  Since I also received several requests
askingme to relay the results, here they are:  1) The cable from
the Z88 to the Heathkit Pocket Packet TNC:     Z88
  TNC male DB-9           male DB-25     1      ->    not
connected     2      ->    2     3      ->    3     4      ->
20     5      ->    5     6      ->    not connected     7
->    7     8      ->    8     9      ->    not connected    A
little strange, perhaps, but it works.  Using a shielded cable
is    highly recommended.  2) One undocumented "feature" of the
Z88 is its inability to handle     communications at 7
bits/byte, Even parity, 1 stop bit when receiving     data.  You
can "set" the parity to "Even" from the PANEL (square-S)     but
it only affects outgoing bytes.  All incoming bytes are still
 interpreted as 8-bit bytes, hence, about half show up as
garbage.     The solution:  First hook up your TNC to a "normal"
computer that     is comfortable with 7,E,1 at 9600 baud.  Then
issue the PARITY 0 and     AWLEN 8 commands.     Turn the TNC
off.  Next, set the PANEL on the Z88 for parity "None"      and
the baud for 9600.  Start the TERMINAL application from the
index     menu.     Plug the TNC into the Z88 and turn it on.
You should now see the     Heathkit welcome message.  3)
"delete" is entered as CTRL-H or SHIFT-DEL.  4) To copy to a log
file, use "square"-"plus sign"-S .  This will copy     the data
into a file "S.SGN".  To stop logging, use "square"-"minus sign"
    -S.   See p. 192 of the Z88 user manual for more info.The
Z88 runs about 6-8 hours per charge on 4 AA nicads, and the Icom
2AT witha BP8 has been going for over 12 hours air time so far.
Then again, I'vemostly been listening rather than transmitting.
The internal battery packfor the pocket-packet only lasted 2
hours with the LEDs enabled; another4 AAs external should take
care of it.If anyone else sets up a Z88 packet system, please
let me know.  I am interested in hearing how others cope with
power-supply differences andcables.
-Tom------------------------------Date: 3 Nov 89 17:12:27
GMTFrom:
cs.utexas.edu!samsung!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!wuarchive!texbell!texsun
!waveguide.Central.Sun.COM![e-mail]:
 Docs for KA9Q NET.EXE?I'm new to TCP/IP on packet.  I have the
executables for the NET.EXE program,and actually got something
to work yesterday.  I was hoping I could justfigure it all out,
since I have some passing experience with TCP/IP on anethernet,
but... I think I need some documentation!Can anyone provide a
site I can FTP the docs from? The executables came
fromcs.pitt.EDU (thanks, guys!), but no docs are online
there...Thanks..  Mike Westerhof, KA9WSB
[e-mail]  (and, with documentation,
ka9wsb.ampr.org!)------------------------------Date: 31 Oct 89
20:30:00 GMTFrom:
gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!mailrus!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!
torsqnt!tmsoft!nebulus![e-mail]  (Dennis S.
Breckenridge)Subject: Need Unix NOS I am looking for the NOS
sources ported to System V Unix. I have  an old version and
require an update. I am looking for something as current as the
new MessyDos version 891022 NOS. Has anyone ported it yet (or is
working on it) I will port it if no one else has done this.--
*****************************************************************
****Dennis S. Breckenridge VE3-GSS      QTH:  Toronto, Canada
AMPR.ORG: [44.135.88.55]            UUCP:
uunet!tmsoft!nebulus!dennis**************************************
*******************************------------------------------Date
: 2 Nov 89 23:06:26 GMTFrom: dtseng![e-mail]  (Robert
P. Scott)Subject: Need Unix NOSIn article
<1989Oct31.203000.9645@nebulus>, root@nebulus (Dennis S.
Breckenridge) writes:>  I am looking for the NOS sources ported
to System V Unix. I have >  an old version and require an
update. I am looking for something>  as current as the new
MessyDos version 891022 NOS. Has anyone ported>  it yet (or is
working on it) I will port it if no one else has done>  this.>
--     My situation EXACTLY!  Unfortunately, the similar request I
posted    last week has netted only additional requests for
whatever I receive.      Surely SOMEONE reading this group has the
newest code.  But how can we    coerce them into mailing it out to
us?  I'd be willing to do some    or all of the porting from the
newest MSDOS version as well (if    someone is willing to provide
that!)> Dennis S. Breckenridge VE3-GSS      QTH:  Toronto,
Canada > AMPR.ORG: [44.135.88.55]            UUCP:
uunet!tmsoft!nebulus!dennis-- D T S  Engineering     |  Robert
P. ScottP. O. Box 277          |  ...!decvax!dtseng!rps --
...!harvard!zinn!dtseng!rpsHudson, NH  03051-0277 |
[phone]          |    ------------------------------Date:
3 Nov 89 13:48:40 GMTFrom: mae37.ncsu.edu![e-mail]
(Kenneth Barnhouse/60000)Subject: Using an Alinco DR-110T for
PacketI am just getting into packet radio (Yeah!). I just got a
used MFJ-1270TNC-2 andI want to interface it to an ALINCO
DR-110T 2-meter transceiver.  Has anyoneused an Alinco for
packet, and if so, how did you setup the cables?  The onlything
I am not sure about is that the Alinco has a general ground and
a seperate ground for the Microphone. The MFJ only has a common
audio/PTT ground.How can I handle this difference?  Any
suggestions are greatly appreciated.Also, any other things to
watch out for would be appreciated.Also, does anyone know what
the current (highest) rom revision level is outfor the MFJ-1270?
 Can I get new rom's from MFJ?  I want to make sure thatMFJ is
as up-to-date as possible.Thanks in advance,Ken Barnhouse,
N4VQKSystems Programmer            Internet:
[e-mail] Computer Operations        BITNET:
BARNHOUSE@NCSUCHE orBARNHOUSE@NCSUMAEVNorth Carolina State
University        Phone:   (919)
737-2458------------------------------Date: Fri, 03 Nov 89
10:59:13 MEZFrom: [e-mail]:
xfer at > 1200 bpsin pr-digest 220>From: sol|[e-mail]
(Phil R. Karn) writes:ka9q> Subject: packet radio >1200
bpska9q>ka9q> The problem with almost every "standard" telephone
modem is thatka9q> they're just not very suitable for radio
operation. They're designedka9q> for fullduplex telephone
connections, where you have much more S/Nka9q> than bandwidth,
and where you can spend 5 seconds to train andka9q> equalize the
path at the beginning of each "transmission". Packetka9q> radio
modems have to operate efficiently in burst mode (which
tendska9q> to rule out coherent demodulation, especially with
large signalka9q> constellations) and optimizing S/N performance
is more importantka9q> than fitting into 3 KHz of spectrum
(which also rules out the moreka9q> complex signal
constellations that are quite popular in high speedka9q> phone
line modems.)ka9q>ka9q> Phil| | | | | | | | | | | | |I'd like to
place several exclamation marks behind this, because somehams
tend to 'forget' these basic rules of physics.Derived from that
we'll get the next basic requisition of a dc-component-free
modulation scheme ( and low-frequency-free ). You can't
switchfaster ( receive <-> transmit) than the lowest modulation
frequencyyou'd like to xfer.And this is a basic problem of
simple FSK modems( k9ng/g3ruh modems   for example ).
Low-frequency components can NOT bestripped by means of a
scrambler.And because of all these criterias I developed a PR
modem whichutilizes a 4-phase DPSK scheme. It's free of any
dc-component so itsynchronizes/ trains within 5 msec @ 4800 bps
or < 2.5 msec @ 9600( works at higher bitrates too, but signal
width increases analogous ).No external squelch is required and
S/N is better than on some XR modems( see one of the preveous
digital commitee proceedings ): < 18dB @ 10^-6 BERR.Development
of these modems startet late 1986 and boards arespreaded since
1987.But high speed xfer isn't a simple task to do. Otherwise it
would havebeen done long time b4.Detlef ( dk4eg @ dk0mav
).------------------------------Date: 2 Nov 89 12:00:50 GMTFrom:
texbell!splut![e-mail]  (Jay "you ignorant splut!"
Maynard)Subject: XOBBS problem in Microport and XenixIn article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jim Durham)
writes:>Incidentally, there are *many* bug fixes since the code
that was >distributed at Dayton with the .1 version of 'net'. I
will put the>latest bbs code out on cs.pitt.edu in the
ftp/pub/ka9q directory as>'xobbs.shar.Z' . Can you generate a
patch file and post it, to alt.sources if not here?Not everyone
has FTP access.-- Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL   | Never
ascribe to malice that which [e-mail]
(eieio)| adequately be explained by
stupidity.{attctc,bellcore}!texbell!splut!jay
+----------------------------------------Shall we try for
comp.protocols.tcp-ip.eniac next, Richard? - Brandon
Allbery------------------------------End of PACKET-RADIO Digest
V89 Issue #226***************************************** 6-Nov-89
02:39:42-MST,7563;000000000000Mail-From: KPETERSEN created at
6-Nov-89 02:32:37Return-Path:
<[e-mail]>Date: Mon,  6 Nov
89 02:32:36 MSTFrom:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: PACKET-RADIO Digest
V89 #227To: [e-mail]-RADIO
Digest         Mon,  6 Nov 89       Volume 89 : Issue 227Today's
Topics:                   Docs for KA9Q NET.EXE? (2 msgs)
       The Amateur Radio BBS - Now back ONLINE!
XOBBS problem in Microport and
Xenix------------------------------------------------------------
----------Date: 4 Nov 89 16:48:22 GMTFrom:
cs.utexas.edu!samsung!aplcen!wb3ffv![e-mail]
u  ( WB3FFV)Subject: Docs for KA9Q NET.EXE?From article
<[e-mail]>, by
[e-mail]:> > I'm new to TCP/IP on
packet.  I have the executables for the NET.EXE program,> and
actually got something to work yesterday.  I was hoping I could
just> figure it all out, since I have some passing experience
with TCP/IP on an> ethernet, but... I think I need some
documentation!> > Can anyone provide a site I can FTP the docs
from? The executables came from> cs.pitt.EDU (thanks, guys!),
but no docs are online there...   Hello All,Well I can't offer
FTP for anybody, but can offer dialup&download or UUCPaccess to
any of the KA9Q software.  Since it has been a while, and my
systemwas down due to misfortune for about seven weeks (bad
drive :-( ), I willpost the information on how to access my
system to this group again.  I tryto keep all the KA9Q software
and it's variants on the
machine...-------------------------------------------------------
------------------------Internet  :
[e-mail]    |    Howard D. LeadmonUUCP      :
wb3ffv!howardl        |    Fast Computer Service, Inc.TELEX     :
152252474             |    P. O. Box 171 Telephone :
(301)-335-2206        |    Chase, MD
21027-0171------------------------------Date: 5 Nov 89 05:57:28
GMTFrom: cadre.dsl.pitt.edu!pitt!w2xo![e-mail]  (Jim
Durham)Subject: Docs for KA9Q NET.EXE?[e-mail]
writes:> > I'm new to TCP/IP on packet.  I have the executables
for the NET.EXE program,> and actually got something to work
yesterday.  I was hoping I could just> figure it all out, since
I have some passing experience with TCP/IP on an> ethernet,
but... I think I need some documentation!> > Can anyone provide
a site I can FTP the docs from? The executables came from>
cs.pitt.EDU (thanks, guys!), but no docs are online there...>
Yes, you will find the file 'net_doc.arc' in the ftp/pub/ka9q
directoryat louie.udel.edu and I also placed a copy in the same
directory atcs.pitt.edu .-73, Jim, W2XO  (W2XO @ W2XO)
(w2xo![e-mail])
(cs.pitt.edu!jcd)------------------------------Date: 4 Nov 89
16:56:05 GMTFrom:
cs.utexas.edu!usc!samsung!aplcen!wb3ffv![e-mail]-stat
e.edu  ( WB3FFV)Subject: The Amateur Radio BBS - Now back
ONLINE!+---------------------------------------------------------
---------------------+        HOW TO ACCESS THE WB3FFV AMATEUR
RADIO TELEPHONE BBS !!! I have placed a BBS system on-line that
is mainly oriented towards the Amateur Community (but there is
other stuff on-line). As of now I have notattempted to promote
this system any place except in the amateur channels(PACKET,
USENET, & word of mouth), and will continue under this policy,
asI hope to keep it oriented toward amateur radio. The various
software forUP/DOWNload is available via telephone dialup and
Packet TCP/IP, and throughuser support I hope to keep the latest
and greatest ham software on-line.Below is the information that
is needed in order to access the BBS viaTelephone -or- TCP/IP,
please pass it around to as many ham's as possible. System Name:
WB3FFV Login: bbs Number: (301)-335-0858 -- 1200 & 2400
(Non-MNP) Number: (301)-335-1955 -- 2400 (MNP), 9600 & 19200
(PEP)   [V.32 soon] Data Settings: 8 Bits, NO Parity, 1 Stop Bit
Times: 24hrs/365days  (except for routine maintenance) Software:
XBBS  (UNIX/Xenix Multiuser BBS) IP Address: 44.60.0.1
{wb3ffv.ampr.org}  [for FTP access on 145.550 mhz ONLY] Misc.
Info: Machine is an 80386 computer running UNIX V.3.2 and
features 700              Meg of on-line storage. Most transfer
protocols are available!!             MNP up to Level-5 is
supported.  I attempt to keep the latest and greatest HAM
software on-line, and encourageall to upload anything new that
they come up with, as it is of benefit to all.Here is a sample
of a couple pieces of software that is available for DOWNLOAD:
KA9Q TCP/IP Software for the PC (Latest OFFICIAL release + TEST
Versions)  KA9Q TCP/IP for the Atari-ST, MAC, & Amiga KA9Q
TCP/IP for UNIX based systems WA7MBL BBS for the PC (Versions
3.31, 4.31 & 5.12) W0RLI BBS for the PC (Versions 6.xx, 7.xx,
8.xx, 9.xx) MSYS BBS for the PC running KISS TNC's  (Version
1.05) Various BBS utilities and enhancements Several MORSE CODE
Tutors TheNet software by NORD><LINK  (Version 1.01)
Modifications for many HAM Rigs and Scanners Digital Signal
Processing software (DSP) DX and contesting programs ARRL
Newsletters & Gateway W5YI Electronic Edition There is much more
available on the BBS, and I don't want to waste a lot ofPACKET
BBS space trying to list it all, so if you are interested give
it acall and see for yourself !!!If you are interested in using
UUCP to connect to the BBS, this can also bedone as I support
Anon-uucp. The login to the system is 'uucpanon', and there is
NO password. The listing of avalible archives are stored in a
file called'FILES', and it is located in the
/usr/spool/uucppublic. To retrieve the fileslisting just use the
following command:uucp wb3ffv!~/FILES /usr/spool/uucppublic
This will move a copy of my files listing into your uucppublic
directory.  Ifyou have any questions or problems, feel free to
contact me at one of the numbers/adresses below. Good
Luck...----------------------------------------------------------
---------------------Internet  :
[e-mail]    |    Howard D. LeadmonUUCP      :
wb3ffv!howardl        |    Fast Computer Service, Inc.TELEX     :
152252474             |    P. O. Box 171 Telephone :
(301)-335-2206        |    Chase, MD
21027-0171------------------------------Date: 5 Nov 89 05:52:03
GMTFrom: cadre.dsl.pitt.edu!pitt!w2xo![e-mail]  (Jim
Durham)Subject: XOBBS problem in Microport and
[e-mail] writes:> In article <[e-mail]>
[e-mail] (Jim Durham) writes:> >Incidentally, there are
*many* bug fixes since the code that was > >distributed at
Dayton with the .1 version of 'net'. I will put the> >latest bbs
code out on cs.pitt.edu in the ftp/pub/ka9q directory as>
>'xobbs.shar.Z' . > In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Jim Durham) writes:> > Can you generate a patch file and post
it, to alt.sources if not here?> Not everyone has FTP access.>
Yes I can, look for it soon. First, I have to be certain just
whatBdale distributed, as I assume the diffs would be for the
version ofthe bbs distributed at Dayton (.1 Pre-NOS version)
??-Jim, W2XO   (W2XO @ W2XO)
(w2xo![e-mail])------------------------------End of
PACKET-RADIO Digest V89 Issue
#227***************************************** 8-Nov-89
09:18:56-MST,8860;000000000000Return-Path:
<[e-mail]>Date: Wed,  8 Nov
89 09:15:10 MSTFrom:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: PACKET-RADIO Digest
V89 #228To: [e-mail]-RADIO
Digest         Wed,  8 Nov 89       Volume 89 : Issue 228Today's
Topics:     A follow-up to packetRADIOs using automatic power
adjustment                            Need Unix NOS
     NET problem in execl (Xenix 286)                     ROM's
for an MFJ 1270 TNC-2                        STARTING OUT ON
PACKET                      TAPR 9600 Baud packetRADI
             TNC220 USERS
WANTED-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------Date: 6 Nov 89 15:56:49 GMTFrom:
mcsun!sunic!sics.se!sics.se![e-mail]  (Anders
Klemets)Subject: A follow-up to packetRADIOs using automatic
power adjustmentIn article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Louis A. Mamakos) writes:> I don't think that this is a good
idea.  If you lower your power, you will > increase the
hidden-terminal problem.Yes but you are not supposed to lower
only the power. You must also decreasethe sensitivity of the
receiver!If both stations lower both their power and sensitivity
then they will needto use more power than if they used maximum
sensitivity, obviously.But this will lessen the hidden-terminal
problem.There are two ranges to handle: the transmission range
and the carrierdetection range. There is a paper where it is
discussed whether thetransmission range should be greater than
the carrier dection range or notin conjunction with special
routing algorithms.The paper is by Jens Zander SM5HEV and is
called "Carrier detection rangecontrol in multihop packet radio
networks", published in the proceedingsof EUROCON 88. I might be
able to arrange paper or machine readablecopies of it if anyone
is interested.See also "Design considerations of a distributed
packet radio networkusing the radio amateur band" by Persson and
Forchheimer, Linkoping University 1980.I have also seen
references to "Transmission range control in multihoppacket
radio networks" by Hou and Li in IEEE Transactions on
Communications,January 1986 and"Optimal transmission range
control for randomly distributed packet radioterminals" by
Takagi and Kleinrock, IEEE Trans. on Comm., March 1984.Anders
[e-mail]------------------------------Date: 6 Nov
89 20:15:43 GMTFrom: fe2o3![e-mail]  (Michael
Katzmann)Subject: Need Unix NOSIn article <[e-mail]>
[e-mail] (Robert P. Scott) writes:   >In article
<1989Oct31.203000.9645@nebulus>, root@nebulus (Dennis S.
Breckenridge) writes:   >>  I am looking for the NOS sources
ported to System V Unix. I have    >>  an old version and
require an update. I am looking for something   >>  as current
as the new MessyDos version 891022 NOS. Has anyone ported   >>
it yet (or is working on it) I will port it if no one else has
done   >>  this.   >> --    >    My situation EXACTLY!
Unfortunately, the similar request I postedetc   >   >> Dennis
S. Breckenridge VE3-GSS      QTH:  Toronto, Canada    >>
AMPR.ORG: [44.135.88.55]            UUCP:
uunet!tmsoft!nebulus!dennis   >--    >D T S  Engineering     |
Robert P. ScottI down loaded the 890421.1 software from Howard's
(wb3ffv) ham bbs on the weekend. It compiled on my sysV.2 system
without trouble. I'll try iton my home V.3 system in a few days.
Read the blurb in rec.ham.radio onhow to access the wb3ffv
machine. The files are in
/usr/bbs/ham/ka9q/net_src.arc(although its in arc ed format, it
has BSD V.2 and V.3 sources + PC, amiga etc)
/usr/bbs/ham/ka9q/net_doc.arc(the documentation (all 100 pages).
(pitty its not in troff
format!)).-------------------------------------------------------
--------------email to UUCP:
uunet!mimsy!{arinc,fe203,wb3ffv}!vk2bea!michael                          _ _ _
               _     Amateur    |    VK2BEA    (Australia)      ' ) ) )
   /           //     Radio    |    G4NYV    (United Kingdom)  / / / o _.
/_  __.  _  //    Stations|    NV3Z    (United States)     / ' (_<_(__/
/_(_/|_</_</_Michael KatzmannBroadcast Sports Technology.2135
Espey Ct. #4Crofton Md. 21114 USAPh: +1 301 721
5151------------------------------Date: 6 Nov 89 07:40:01
GMTFrom:
snorkelwacker!usc!cs.utexas.edu!execu!sequoia!texbell!ark!lrark!a
rgate![e-mail]  (Unet PBBS
Administrator)Subject: NET problem in execl (Xenix 286)I have
gotten ka9q tcp/ip compiled and installed on a Xenix 286system.
It took quite a bit of playing with flags, fixing msggetproblem
(as mentioned earlier) and a couple of beers.I have run into a
situation, though, that has me buffalo'ed.  I havehooked my bbs
software (uNET - a RLI, etc compatible) into net insteadof
XOBBS. It was a problem and still is.  Everything would work
fine until I did an execl.  The exec would fail. After trying
everything I came up with:
if(execl("unet.tcp","unet.tcp",arg1,arg2,arg3,arg4,arg5,0) < 0)
{         ....this works in the mbx_state(axp,old,new) function.  It
should not, according to the manual which states that I must
have the completepath in the first string.  Every book states
that.  I am doing it inthe home directory, so I was not too
concerned.But, neither the above command, or the one done as
shown by all manualswill work in ANY of the other execl calls.
I get a bad exec on boththe forwarder and nr4in call.  I have
tried everything I can imagine. Iforced each part of the
statement to their respective cast [like(char *)"unet.tcp"] to
no avail.  The variable errno return an error14, as it did with
the one that now works in mbx_state.Any one have any
advice?:---------------------------------------------------------
---------:: Richard Duncan  WD5B           Packet:  WD5B @
WD5B.AR.USA.NA    :: Little Rock, AR                BBS:
501/568-6809 (2400/1200) :: UUCP:
...!texbell!ark!lrark!argate!richard
::---------------------------------------------------------------
---:------------------------------Date: 6 Nov 89 14:48:07
GMTFrom: mae37.ncsu.edu![e-mail]  (Kenneth
Barnhouse/60000)Subject: ROM's for an MFJ 1270 TNC-2Does anyone
know what the latest ROM level is for the MFJ 1270 TNC-2?I just
picked one up at our club auction and I want to make sure thatit
is up-to-date.  Does MFJ still support this older model?Any
comments would be appreciated,Ken Barnhouse, N4VQK        internet:
[e-mail] Programmer        bitnet:
BARNHOUSE@NCSUCHENorth Carolina State
University------------------------------Date: Mon, 6 Nov 89
13:43 CDTFrom: "FEROZ GHOUSE, N9FJL/4S7FG"
<[e-mail]>Subject: STARTING OUT ON PACKETHI FOLKS: I
AM NEW TO PACKET AND DO NOT KNOW TOO MUCH ABOUT WHAT IS OUT AND
AVAILABLEFOR A NEWCOMER. I WILL BE USING A ZENITH 286 MACHINE
FOR PACKET AND IWAS WONDERING IF SOME OF YOU ALL MIGHT BE ABLE
TO OFFER TIPS ON REASONABLYPRICED TNCS AND PACKET SOFTWARE (FOR
MS-DOS) THAT I MIGHT BE ABLE TOUSE. I AM A "POOR" COLLEGE
STUDENT AND AS SUCH CANNOT AFFORD TOO MUCH. ALSO, HAS ANYONE HAD
ANY EXPERIENCES WITH BOARDS THAT COMBINE PACKET, AMODEM AND A
FAX ALL IN ONE FOR PCS AND COMPATIBLES? MAYBE THIS IS A WAYI
COULD GO??  THANKS A LOT, FEROZ GHOUSE, 4S7FG/N9FJL  REPLY TO
NET OR TO <[e-mail]>
------------------------------Date: 3 Nov 89 21:04:00 GMTFrom:
cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!uwm.edu!mailrus!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!t
orsqnt!tmsoft!masnet!canremote![e-mail]-state.e
du  (CLINTON EVANS)Subject: TAPR 9600 Baud packetRADII have
recently set up a 2m packet station in Midland, 80 miles north
of Toronto.  I am looking for some packet users with whome to
communicate outside the immediate area.My callsign is VE3XYM and
my local auto-forwarding PBBS is VE3KYT-1.  I will find any mail
left there.  This message is from CRS in Toronto, and my usnet
address there is [e-mail].  It would be good
to hear from you.RegardsClinton--- ~ DeLuxe 1.11a10
#1716------------------------------Date: Wed,  8 Nov 89
14:02:58 EETFrom: [e-mail]:
TNC220 USERS WANTEDIs there a user of TNC220/PACCOM in this
list? I would like to havea contact with him for a discussion
and possible modifications of thisTNC.George
Katsimaglis------------------------------End of PACKET-RADIO
Digest V89 Issue #228*****************************************
9-Nov-89 00:30:07-MST,11382;000000000000Return-Path:
<[e-mail]>Date: Thu,  9 Nov
89 00:24:35 MSTFrom:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: PACKET-RADIO Digest
V89 #229To: [e-mail]-RADIO
Digest         Thu,  9 Nov 89       Volume 89 : Issue 229Today's
Topics:                       440 MHz translator pairs
    Have the name - need the call!! (2 msgs)          Help!  NET
890421.1 eats my uploaded file's EOLs!                   Info
needed on pocket TNC; HK-21                            Need Unix
NOS                       Revised ROSES-1 Schedule
      ROM's for an MFJ 1270
TNC-2------------------------------------------------------------
----------Date: 7 Nov 89 23:47:29 GMTFrom:
atha![e-mail]  (Lyndon Nerenberg)Subject: 440 MHz
translator pairsI'm currently working on setting up a 100 KHz
wide linear translatorthat will run in the 440 MHz band. It will
be used in conjunctionwith the GRAPES 56K modem boards to
provide us with a local CSMA/CDnetwork.We are having some
trouble picking a suitable frequency pair tooperate on. The VE6
frequency coordinator wants to assign us astandard NBFM repeater
pair (443.8+) however I'm not sure ifthis is such a good idea,
given the bandwidth and emission typewe will be running. It
would make more sense (to me) to allocatea pair of 100 KHz
packet channels, however the 440 bandplandocuments I have seen
are very hazy on wide bandwidth packetrepeater allocations in
this band. Is there any kind of precedentfor this that we could
use?-- Lyndon Nerenberg  VE6BBM / Computing Services / Athabasca
University  {alberta,decwrl,lsuc}!atha!lyndon ||
[e-mail]                  The Connector is the
Notwork.------------------------------Date: 8 Nov 89 16:03:04
GMTFrom: ncrlnk!ncrcce![e-mail]  (Chuck
Rissmeyer)Subject: Have the name - need the call!!Question:Is
there a way to find out somebody's call sign if you know their
name?I don't know if Buckmasters (tm) can do it, and even if
they could, I don'tneed the service bad enough to spend the
Bucks they want.  There must be a database somewhere else that
hams can access and do searches on.  I see peoplelooking for
lost ham buddies all the time.  In my case, it is a
lostrelative.It would even be nicer to find out all the hams in
a given area or to find thecall of a ham at a given address.
The call book is fine for finding theinformation if you know the
call.I wonder if the FCC has a complete set of files they sell.
Maybe there's aneed here that can be filled by a cheap
"inexpensive" service.Anybody want to go into business? :-)
Maybe the packet networks could havethis service incorporated
into it.Thanks,  Chuck Rissmeyer (KE0VG)                  | All
ideas are mine alone!       [e-mail]

------------------------------Date: 8 Nov 89 18:44:43 GMTFrom:
gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!sunybcs![e-mail]
(Devon Bowen)Subject: Have the name - need the call!!In article
<[e-mail]>, [e-mail](Chuck
Rissmeyer) writes:> Is there a way to find out somebody's call
sign if you know their name?The Internet callsign server on
marvin.cs.buffalo.edu allows search by call,search by last name
and search by city. See the message I posted a few daysago for
how to access the system. If you're not on the Internet send me
asmuch info as you can and I'll try to track them down and mail
you the results.Devon------------------------------Date: 8 Nov
89 21:20:57 GMTFrom:
gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!aplcen!stda.jhuapl.edu![e-mail]
.ohio-state.edu  (Marshall Jose)Subject: Help!  NET 890421.1
eats my uploaded file's EOLs!     I've decided to hold for the
moment with 890421.1, and mosteverything is ducky, except...
NET strips any end-of-line sequences from any text being
sentwith the "upload" command.  I have obtained the code to
provide me withsome insight, but it I find the NET's general
layout scheme is somewhatopaque, and I can't even find the
routine where the upload-file's linesare read and sent.  Hence
these two questions:A.  Where is the offending section of code,
andB.  Would I be able to use Turbo-C 1.5 to compile 890421.1?
  Any NET hackers out there with a clue?  Thanks,Marshall Jose
[e-mail]  ||
...mimsy!aplcen!aplvax!mjj------------------------------Date: 8
Nov 89 16:38:48 GMTFrom: dtseng![e-mail]
(uucp)Subject: Info needed on pocket TNC; HK-21Can anyone tell
me if the little pocket TNC that Heathsells (HK-21) supports
KISS mode?  One I looked at (aboutone year out of date) didn't
so I'm actually asking ifthey have added KISS mode
support.rps------------------------------Date: 8 Nov 89 14:09:41
GMTFrom:
cs.utexas.edu!mailrus!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!torsqnt!tmsoft!nebu
lus![e-mail]  (Dennis S.
Breckenridge)Subject: Need Unix [e-mail] (Michael
Katzmann) writes:blah blah ... lots deleted>I down loaded the
890421.1 software from Howard's (wb3ffv) ham bbs on the
>weekend. It compiled on my sysV.2 system without trouble. I'll
try it>on my home V.3 system in a few days. Read the blurb in
rec.ham.radio onCompiling is one thing, actually working is
something else. I have svnosxx.22u and smtp is broken amoung
other things. I will take a look atthe newer programs and post
my results.  I also have a fixed version of svbm (bmq) and smtp
for unix 3.2If you want it call [phone] for a TB2500 or
733-1609 for a Microcom 9624. Its called newsmtp.cpio.Z and it
can be found in /usr/local/bbs/data/packet/newsmtp.cpio.Z. I
have an open uucp accountcalled "bbsuucp" with no password to
uucp it off. >UUCP:
uunet!mimsy!{arinc,fe203,wb3ffv}!vk2bea!michael>     Amateur    |
VK2BEA    (Australia)      ' ) ) )      /           //>     Radio    |
G4NYV    (United Kingdom)  / / / o _. /_  __.  _  //>    Stations|
NV3Z    (United States)     / ' (_<_(__/ /_(_/|_</_</_>Michael
Katzmann>Broadcast Sports Technology.>2135 Espey Ct. #4>Crofton
Md. 21114 USA>Ph: [phone]Thanks de ve3gss--
************************************************************NAME:
 Dennis S. Breckenridge        UUCP: 145.03MhzAMPR.ORG: [44.135.88.54]
VE3GSS        QTH: Toronto,
Canada***********************************************************
*------------------------------Date: 8 Nov 89 23:53:29 GMTFrom:
att!cbnewsh![e-mail]
(j.gordon.beattie)Subject: Revised ROSES-1 Schedule
IMMEDIATE RELEASETO: ALL@ALLBBSFROM:N2DSY@KD6THBID:
$0811_ROSESSUBJECT: ROSES-1 Event Schedule
   11 November 1989                      ROSES-1 Schedule of
Events                        As of 28 October 1989The New
Jersey Institute of Technology Amateur Radio Club andthe Radio
Amateur Telecommunications Society are co-sponsoringthe first
RATS Opens Systems Environment Symposium (ROSES-1).ROSES-1 will
be held on the 11th of November 1989 in the StudentCenter of the
New Jersey Institute of Technology from 8AM to6PM.  Talk-in will
be on 145.19 (-600) and 147.225 (+600) MHz.For further
information contact Gordon Beattie, N2DSY at201-387-8896 or via
packet [e-mail] event will include talks for the new and
experienced operator.All software discussed at the sessions will
be available for free.(plus cost of media - so bring 5-1/4 or
3-1/2 inch disks)Also: Question and Answer Sessions,
Demonstrations,       TNC Tune-up (bring TNC and radio)
Equipment Literature,      Software Distribution,      License
Examinations.NOTE: ALL Sessions include a Question and Answer
period. Plan on dinner with your fellow operators!For further
information contact:General: Gordon Beattie, N2DSY  201-387-8896
 n2dsy@kd6thTesting: Pete Adley, K2MHP      201-796-6622The
tentative schedule follows:         Activity 1
Activity 2
----------------------------------------------------------------0
8:00    Coffee, Tea,             License Exams         Doughnuts
                  Start
*09:00    Introductions,                *         Announcements
               *                                       *09:15
How to Set Up a               *         Packet Station
     *                                       *10:00    Operating
a Personal          *         Mailbox                       *
                                   *11:00    Networking with the
         End         ROSE X.25 Switch12:00    Frequency
Coordination         Forum12:30    Announcements
<------------- Lunch ------------->
Available in Cafeteria13:00    ROSErver/Packet          Packet
for the Blind         Radio Mailbox            Voice Synthesizer
Demo             System User Forum             *14:00    Open
Systems Mail,       ROSErver/PRMBS Demonstration
Directory and                 *               Network Management
           *         Forum                         *15:00
Break,                   ROSE X.25 Switch Demonstration
Announcements                 *
     *15:15    Broadcast File                *
Distribution                  *         and Roundtables
     *         via Packet                    *         16:00
User Forum               ROSErver and ROSE X.25 Switch
Open Q&A                 Switch Sysops Meeting         for All!
               All Welcome!
 *16:30    Informal Discussions,         *         Demos Before
                *         Dinner at the Diner           *Let us
know if you're planning to attend by sending a packet message
toN2DSY@KD6TH.73, and see you at ROSES-1 !Gordon Beattie,
N2DSY------------------------------Date: 7 Nov 89 21:39:30
GMTFrom:
zephyr.ens.tek.com!tektronix!gvgpsa!gvgpvd![e-mail]
(Andy Peterman)Subject: ROM's for an MFJ 1270 TNC-2In article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Kenneth
Barnhouse/60000) writes:>Does anyone know what the latest ROM
level is for the MFJ 1270 TNC-2?>I just picked one up at our
club auction and I want to make sure that>it is up-to-date.
Does MFJ still support this older model?I just got version 1.2.6
from MFJ a few weeks ago.  It supports mailboxand KISS modes.
It requires 32K of RAM.  I got both from MFJ for about$40.
Release date is 1988, however, and I've seen others with
mailboxesthat seem different, so I'm not sure if its the latest
in the TNC-2style ROMs.  The documentation is full of typos, so
if you get a copy ofthat, beware.    Andy Peterman,
KE6KC    [e-mail]------------------------------End
of PACKET-RADIO Digest V89 Issue
#229*****************************************12-Nov-89
09:32:43-MST,18635;000000000000Return-Path:
<[e-mail]>Date: Sun, 12 Nov
89 09:15:07 MSTFrom:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: PACKET-RADIO Digest
V89 #230To: [e-mail]-RADIO
Digest         Sun, 12 Nov 89       Volume 89 : Issue 230Today's
Topics:         Can anyone recommend a Kaypro II Packet BBS
program                 CP/M HAM terminal, TCP-IP  ATARI ST.
              Info needed on pocket TNC; HK-21
             NEPRA                       New domain.[ch] for NOS
                    Thoughts on packet 'n' stuff   What is this
newsgroup all about? (Introduction for a
newcomer?)-------------------------------------------------------
---------------Date: 11 Nov 89 15:10:15 GMTFrom:
gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!dogie.macc.wisc.edu![e-mail].o
hio-state.edu  (Peter A. Dinda - MIC@MACC -
608/263/7744)Subject: Can anyone recommend a Kaypro II Packet
BBS programCan anyone recommend a Packet BBS program running
under CP/M fora two floppy Kaypro II?  We just got this machine
as a donation tothe campus amateur radio club and are trying to
find somethinguseful to do with it.  Many thanks.  Please direct
E-mail to thefollowing address:
+-----------------------------+----------------------------------
-----+ : Peter A. Dinda              : Microcomputer Information
Center at   : : [e-mail] <*> : Madison Academic
Computing Center     : : [e-mail]     : 1210 W
Dayton St., Rooms 1150A, 1106A : : MIC@MACC BBS => 608 263 6057:
Madison, WI 53706                     : : "Microsoft?  Ick!"
     : 608 263 7744                          :
+-----------------------------+----------------------------------
-----+------------------------------Date: Fri, 10 Nov 89
16:01:57 SETFrom: [e-mail]:
CP/M HAM terminal, TCP-IP  ATARI ST.I have a friend that owns a
TRS80 model II (you know the one that runsCPM). He's also a
packeteer and using for the moment a terminalemulator program
(standart type), being interrested by a more friendlyinterface
(that is split screen type) he asked me if there wassomething
available in PD floating around, I'd be thankfull for anyinfo
concerning this program type, what where ... (NO FTP tho I'm
onBitnet ... SIMTEL's OK).Now I got downloaded the last release
of TCP-IP for the ATARI ST serieand blitzly installed home, got
some problems with the file interfacethough, it seems that the
sprintf(file_path,"%s/%s",sub_dir,file_name)was left unchanged,
it should be more or
lesssprintf(file_path,"%s%s",sub_dir,file_name)
   ^^ due to TOS path names. this means SMTP doesnot work at
all, I've been able to get FTP,TELNET, I tried to zap
thebinaries and change the format to the right one but I just
made itworse (BOMBS!)  As I do not own one of the compiler used
to generatethe binaries, (I own Prospero 'C') and do not want to
spent too muchtime on it I'd like to konw if some fix has been
send or if theproblem is known by the ST source manger(s) and
when the correctedrelease will be made available (SIMTEL
?).Thanks in advance,             J. P. Coenen  NM9L-ON4KCH/I6
                            Bitnet : ESC1457 @ ESOC
                 HAM : ON4KCH @ IW6MMA (VHF)
                ON4KCH (HF 14.099 MHz
evenings)------------------------------Date: Thu, 9 Nov 89
11:50:36 -0800From: Doug Faunt N6TQS 415-688-8269
<[e-mail]>Subject: Info needed on pocket TNC; HK-21I got
a copy of the firmware from the TASCO u21, which is the
HeathHK-21 in Japan, which has KISS mode.I can't say if current
versions have it stock.------------------------------Date: 8 Nov
89 14:51:10 GMTFrom:
cs.utexas.edu!samsung!cg-atla!raybed2![e-mail]
 (EUGENE BALINSKI)Subject: NEPRAI have noticed that THE NET and
NET ROM nodes effectively eliminate theuse of Kantronics KA-NODE
through the use of two parameters - digipeat OFFand callsign
verification OFF. I would like to suggest that either DIGIPEATbe
left ON, or CALLSIGN VERIFICATION be left OFF, or BOTH to enable
greateruse of the systems by those of us with KA-NODES. No one
disputes the value of the network today, however, connections to
thenetwork are not wholly useful to the casual user sisnce they
do not providean indication of current activity within an area.
The ability to connectto a KA-NODE through NET ROM or THE NET
node would be valuable to many.Of course, if CALLSIGN
VERIFICATION is enabled on THE NET or NET ROM node, a KA-NODE
with an identifier such as NASHUA or HUDSON, cannot be connected
to, since it is not on the NET ROM or THE NET's list of other
THE NET or NET ROM calls and aliases. Furthermore, if
DIGIPEATing is disabled at those sites along, there is no way to
get past the CALLSIGN VERIFICATION process, since a CONNECT
NASHUA VIA MTUNC2 would not work. That also effectively disables
gateway such as NASHGT.I would like to petition NEPRA to modify
their policy to either enabledigipeating, or disable callsign
verification, or both at many of theirTHE NET and NET ROM sites.
This would improve the level of packetcommunications at very
little expense to NEPRA. If only one change wasmade, I would
prefer it to be disabling callsign verification.73, Paul
WA1OMM-------> ALL RESPONSES TO PAUL AT
[e-mail]------------------------------Date: 9
Nov 89 00:52:53 GMTFrom:
cs.utexas.edu!samsung!aplcen!wb3ffv!gvdgpc![e-mail]-stat
e.edu  (Gerard J van der Grinten PA0GRI)Subject: New domain.[ch]
for NOSHello All,After being moved (new nice house with hardly
antenna space (what a fool i am)I picked up Phils latest work.
(891022) (wb3ffv and my nosv27 version) I added the changes Phil
made to domain area and my results are again
onflash.bellcore.com in /pub files domain.c and domain.h . These
are direct replacements for Phils version.  They can also be
found on wb3ffv bbs.Extra features with my version are: Brians
ampr.org file compatible  ($origin support) Muliple line SOA
record handling. All record types can be requested and answered!
Domain server added. (for those not on the internet having a
name server)  Load of a subset of a domain.txt file into memory
(instant cash response) I do hope Phil wil finaly raise my
version to "standard" (Yes, it is not invented "here" syndrome
is still active , i guess.) Please send bug reports if
appicable....Regards, gerard.------------------------------Date:
12 Nov 89 13:27:57 GMTFrom:
asuvax!stjhmc!f238.n107.z1.fidonet.org![e-mail]
rkeley.EDU,Subject: Thoughts on packet 'n' stuffSandy, a lot of
what you see is "regional" in nature. It's true that there are
plenty of Sysops who run a BBS (packet, RTTY, AMTOR MSOs) for
pure ego  satisfaction. They're easy to identify...much like the
old "Repeater God"  syndrome that appeared in the 60s. But let's
not throw out the baby with the  bath water!In this area
(NY-NJ-CT-MA-PA etc) let's call it "northeast", we have indeed
gotten agreements between PBBS Sysops that the systems will be
operated in such  fashion as to give all possible priority to
the manual keyboard users on those  channels. We've been quite
specific: 1. No BBS-to-BBS linking on 2 meters if at all
possible. We've established  complicated BBS-to-BBS trunking and
backbone circuits to link the BBSs on  channels (220, 440) where
"user" activity is not compromised. Whatever BBS  links appear
on the 2-meter channels are used as "backup" only when the 220
and  440 intersystem links fail or become so excessively
congested that there's no  choice but 2 meters. 2. By mutual
agreement, BBSs operating single-port systems will NOT forward
or  accept inbound forwarding during "prime time", which in our
area is defined as  1700 to 0100 local time. We insist that
those hours be "reserved" for the  "users". If a BBS is running
some form of "multi-tasking" software that permits  handling
"users" on a 2-meter port while simultaneously linking
intersystem  traffic on 220 and 440 trunk circuits, that's ok at
any time as long as the  "user" channels remain for the
"exclusive" use of the "users".We've been largely successful
with this approach up here and we see no reason  other than
someone's sticky ego - for NOT doing the same thing or something
 similar in all areas where users share channels with linking
BBSs. There's NO  QUESTION that the "users" must get first
consideration. The bottom line may not  be obvious to some of
these over-inflated Sysops: if they piss off the users  and
drive them all away, then there won't be any need for the
BBSs!!! That's  the real "bottom line".Sandy, the "For Sale"
issue on packet (and in ham radio in general) has been  clearly
resolved two ways; a letter of clarification was issued by the
Commission; the New Part 97 that went into effect on September
1, 1989 also  addresses the issue in non-ambiguous manner. The
point is now moot....thank  God.Couple of additional thoughts
'ere I log off to read the stuff. It's unfair,  after what we've
done with the Hurricane Hugo and the San Francisco earthquake
events, to state that nothing of value is passed via these
packet BBSs. I can't  state how many thousands of pieces of
important traffic (important at least to  the originators and
the addressees) went through my six-port switch and HF net
gateway related to these catastrophic events. There's no point
in shooting the  whole community in the ass because of a
minority of ego-driven jackasses who  can't see the truth
because their own personalities get in the way.Anyone who
rightfully deserves the title of "Sysop" - System Operator- must
be  cognizant at all times of his or her ultimate responsibility
to the USERS!  Anything else is pure crap. Any concerned,
sincere Sysop always considers the  users....after all, the
"users" are the "bread and butter" of any  BBS....without 'em,
you need a BBS like a hole in the head.Nutha point...the implied
responsibility assumed by the "user" when he or she  climbs on
the packet channels.....not enough users ever ask themselves the
 question, "do I need to do this by packet radio on a channel
dedicated solely  to packet radio?" What I mean is this:There
are literally dozens of cases in which two 'users' who wish to
have a  keyboard-to-keyboard chat are within VHF line of site...
they have a good radio  path between them. When that case exists
and the goal is purely  keyboard-to-keyboard QSO, then who the
hell needs an error-correcting protocol  like packet radio
anyway? Just to show off the latest TNC and the power of the
Plastic Money Card? More ego? Two guys with good radio paths at
VHF or UHF can  certainly move off to some quiet FM simplex
channel and work each other using  ASCII at 1200 bauds, or even
Baudot at 300 bauds for hand-typing a QSO. You can  even
exchange ASCII text files using these non-packet modes...as long
as the  path is solid. It's kinda like the two dudes I used to
know who lived six miles  apart, clear path without any terrain
obstacles...each one running a  synthesized 2-meter rig and
150-watt amplifier into 7 and 11 element  beams.....enough poop
to pump a kilowatt ERP into each other's ears.....but  would you
believe that these two schmucks insisted on pointing their
antennas  at a local "wide-area" repeater instead of working
simplex??? Why did they do  this?? Simple...they were waving
their egos in the air....they needed the  reassurance that
everyone on the channel within 100 mile radius would be sure  to
hear their remarks.Not enough people use the available VHF and
UHF simplex channels with ASCII or  Baudot at the highest speeds
available in their multi-mode controllers. And  from what I see
in this area today, the guy on packet with the "packet-only"
TNC is in the minority. The majority of the people around here
have some kind  of multi-mode unit -- so they can use Baudot and
ASCII if they wish. I've done  it myself many many times and
frankly, for anything except a binary file  transfer, or program
source code in C or Pascal or assembler (where I DO need  error
detection and correction) the throughput achieved using ASCII at
1200  bauds BLOWS PACKET RADIO OUT OF THE WATER!The rules remain
unchanged in the new Part 97 as regards unattended HF
operation. As NCS of the packet net operating on 14.111 under
the Commission's  STA for unattended operation (STA Letter
7230-J), I keep in close touch with  both the League (which
actually obtained the STA for us) and one or two key  folks at
the FCC. The rules still prohibit the unattended operation of
ANY  station on frequencies below 30 MHz without some form of
exceptional authority  like an STA.I too see a significant
number of digipeate rs and BBSs that I KNOW to be  unattended,
especially on 20 meters. These guys place their licenses at
risk.  And from my recent chats (informal telephone contacts)
with the Watch Officers  at the Belfast, ME and Laurel, MD
Monitoring Stations, I know that they are  "looking". I've even
discussed some of the "special features"

contained in the  packet TNCs they're using....from a
manufacturer that coincidentally is a  client for my consulting
services. The FCC guys are not dummies. They go by  priorities
set by their managers. But they do watch, they do "listen". And
so  does the NSA, the DEA, the FBI, and a number of other
un-namable  agencies....looking at the possible use of the ham
bands and digital modes by  illegals perhaps involved with the
drug traffic operations. Time will tell. I  hope.Part of the
real problem with packet radio is that we amateurs are using a
protocol based on X.25, which was specifically designed in the
common carrier  world for use on high-quality, equalized,
noise-free full-duplex higher speed  data lines in dedicated
telephone networks. Now you bring that bastard AX.25  protocol
into our simplex (half-duplex) noisy, poor frequency response,
collision-filled radio world, and you have the packet radio we
"know and love"  today. Pity. Coulda been better choices but the
fraternity went with what was  available based on the IC devices
available such as HDLC chips and the like. If  you could watch a
CCITT X.25 (or its big brother X.75) link zipping along on  the
telephone networks at 56 and 64 KBPS, and higher rates up to
1.54 MBPS,  you'd understand that we're dealing with a
"solution" that is less than optimal  for our unique
environment. It's part of the rationale that makes me personally
 prefer AMTOR/SITOR for traffic handling on HF. The latter
protocols were  specifically designed for our typically-rotten
HF environment, while AX.25 was  NOT.Hierarchical routing is
still a bit premature. According to various sources in  the
programming world, the present implementations by W0RLI, AA4RE
and WA8BXN  will possibly not match the final specs required for
satellite operations and  when those final specs are released,
it's estimated that the existing codes  will require some
significant rewriting. This appears to be the primary reason
why Jeff Jacobsen, WA7MBL, has not yet released a version of his
BBS code  implementing hierarchical routing. As he stated it to
me on the telephone six  months ago, "I only wanna write this
stuff ONCE!!!".And additional analyses are showing that present
implementations may be parsing  backwards....left to right
instead of RIGHT TO LEFT. Seems to make sense when  looking for
that "first match", that the first thing my system wants to know
is  "DOES IT STAY ON THIS CONTINENT? IF NO, THEN GET RID OF IT
TO THE  INTERCONTINENTAL GATEWAY AND IGNORE THE REST CUZ IT'S
MOOT!". We've already  found significant ambiguities in some
hierarchical routes, to much to detail  here. In addition,
there's some question as to the suitability of using the ISO
three-letter country codes instead of the well-established
numeric country  codes used in the CCITT International Numbering
Scheme (in use in the telephone  and telex/gentex networks for
more than 25 years!!!). This may screw up future  possibilities
of interoperability (I love that word!!!) with telephone
networks...something that people are already starting to give
serious thought  to. Any more thoughts?H: 234/1--  Uucp:
...{gatech,ames,rutgers}!ncar!noao!asuvax!stjhmc!107!238!Norman.S
ternberg,.W2JUPInternet:
Norman.Sternberg,[e-mail]-----------------
-------------Date: 11 Nov 89 19:39:55 GMTFrom:
nisca.ircc.ohio-state.edu!hpuxa.ircc.ohio-state.edu![e-mail].o
hio-state.edu  (Peter J. Dotzauer)Subject: What is this
newsgroup all about? (Introduction for a newcomer?)Dear
ham-radio.packeteers:When I stumbled into your newsgroup and
started reading, I didn't understandmuch, so can you provide
some kind of WELCOME posting that introduces newreaders to this
group?Is this group about hardware to send and receive data
between a PC anda host or a network through radio waves
(shortwave bands?), and aboutspecial modems that connect to a
radio transmitter/receiver rather thanthe phone line?What about
the packet email addresses provided by some? How can they
bereached, i.e. what are the prerequisites in terms of hardware
and software?Is there a connection to other networks (usenet,
Fido, Internet,whatevernet?Where can I find a good introduction
to the hardware and vendors(mail order) of the equipment needed
for packet radio? And what abouta short guide to learn more
about the concepts?Please send email, rather than cluttering
your own newsgroup withpostings of things that are not new to
you.-=-Peter Dotzauer: Numerical Cartography Lab, Dept. of
Geography, OSU, Columbus, OH         VOICE: [phone]  FAX:
292-9180  DATA: 293-0081         BITNET: ts3285@ohstvma UUCP:
...!osu-cis!hpuxa.ircc.ohio-state.edu!pjd          FIDO:
1:226/50   INTERNET: [e-mail]
[128.146.1.5]------------------------------End of PACKET-RADIO
Digest V89 Issue
#230*****************************************15-Nov-89
16:13:19-MST,10536;000000000000Mail-From: KPETERSEN created at
15-Nov-89 16:05:42Return-Path:
<[e-mail]>Date: Wed, 15 Nov
89 16:05:41 MSTFrom:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: PACKET-RADIO Digest
V89 #231To: [e-mail]-RADIO
Digest         Wed, 15 Nov 89       Volume 89 : Issue 231Today's
Topics:                                (none)
     Atari ST BM program                       BM for Atari ST
(2 msgs)                               Digicom          KA9Q
890421.1 XOBBS problem on Microport SysV/286
           NEPRA                         upgrade info needed
What is this newsgroup all about? (Introduction for a
newcomer?)-------------------------------------------------------
---------------Date: 15 Nov 89 14:29:43 GMTFrom:
bbn.com![e-mail]  (Bob Clements)Subject: (none)In
article <[e-mail]>
[e-mail] (r p gordon) writes:>Hi,>  Could
someone please inform me as to where I can obtain a copy of>
Bob Clements WD8003e driver in 'C' (or anyone else's for that
matter!).>  >  Thanks in advance,Hi, Ray,Do you really mean that
ancient version in C, rather than the recentones in assembler in
the Clarkson collection?  That one is not aseparate installable
TSR like the Clarkson ones.If so, I found it.  It is based on
the 87xxxx.25 version of net.exeand is in an .arc file
consisting of the changed modules for thatversion, including
that wd8003e driver (ew.c and ew.h).  The fileis net_ew.arc, in
the (default) \public\ directory on
bobcat.bbn.com[128.89.2.103].  That machine is a slow 4.77 MHz
true-blue IBM PC(not even XT) that sits on the corner of my desk
at work.>     Ray Gordon.        [e-mail]
G1XRN73,Bob Clements, K1BC,
[e-mail]------------------------------Date: Tue, 14 Nov
89 14:54:58 GMTFrom: [e-mail] (Diana
Eichert)Subject: Atari ST BM programI downloaded the version of
NET that was posted by Rob PE1CHL atflash.bellcore.com in
/pub/chlnet.  There is no BM.TOS program in the archive for the
ST NET, but there was a sample BM.RC file.Is there a version of
BM for the ST somewhere that works.  Seem's to methat the 8904
port doesn't have BM in it either and has some mentionabout the
version that was there was corrupted in someway.I'm about to
leave this job and go somewhere else that has no net acsess,so
prompt assistance would be appreciated.  ( I'm hoping to be able
to attach to the net, but not immediately )Diana
Eichert------------------------------Date: Tue, 14 Nov 89
15:07:57 GMTFrom: [e-mail] (Diana
Eichert)Subject: BM for Atari STI d/l'd the Rob PE1CHL version
of net from flash.bellcore.com and foundthat it contained
everything but BM.TOS and the schematics for adding theZilog
8350's to the ST.I would appreciate a quick response as I am
soon to lose this account andwill not have net acsess at my new
job for several weeks.Also could anyone who's tried both the
"offical" version and PE1CHL versionsumarize the pro's and con's
of either.        thanks in advance,            diana eichertI do not speak for
Rockwell Power Systems, unless I state
so.------------------------------Date: 15 Nov 89 17:54:28
GMTFrom: mcsun!hp4nl!nikhefh![e-mail]  (Henk
Peek)Subject: BM for Atari [e-mail] (Diana
Eichert) writes:>I d/l'd the Rob PE1CHL version of net from
flash.bellcore.com and found>that it contained everything but
BM.TOS and the schematics for adding the>Zilog 8350's to the
ST.Rob has BM for the atari. I will ask Rob to send it to the
USA fordistribution. There is only a paper version of the
schematics of the8530 interface. You can get an copy by sending
a smail to Rob with afew IRC's. The schematics of a IBM-PC 8530
interface are includedin my paper in the proceedings of the 8
ARRL data conference.73 Henk  PA0HZP   [e-mail]
uunet!mcvax!nikhef!henkp------------------------------Date: 13
Nov 89 17:06:00 GMTFrom:
mailrus!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!utzoo!mnetor!tmsoft!masnet!
canremote![e-mail]  (CLINTON
EVANS)Subject: DigicomDoes anyone have experience of the Digicom
packet system for the C64?  How does it compare with a TNC?  Are
there any magazine articles, books, papers etc that describe the
system?  Is there a Digicom kit?Please reply to
[e-mail]--- ~ DeLuxe 1.11a10
#1716------------------------------Date: 12 Nov 89 19:52:11
GMTFrom: w3vh![e-mail]  (Rolfe Tessem)Subject: KA9Q
890421.1 XOBBS problem on Microport SysV/286In article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Bdale Garbee)
writes:>>This jives with mail I got from Dave Toth, who says
that Microport's>>message queues are broken. Rolfe Tessem,
however, says that he has it>>running on his Microport SysV/286
system, also at 2.4.>>Hmmm.  Wonder if Rolfe is running the
XOBBS code, or just NET... NET by itself>obviously works
fine...>>Ain't "unsupported" unix in binary form fun?
:-)>>BdaleI've been out of town for a while, and must have
missed the originalposting.  I certainly never meant to imply
that I was running the XOBBS codeunder Microport, since I'm not.
 What I probably meant to say was that,thanks to some essential
patches supplied by John Limpert, N3DMC([e-mail]), I
am running NET under Microport SysV/286 2.4.  Youwill have a
hard time running the base release without these patches, and
Ithink that's what I pointed out in my original reply.Rolfe--
UUCP:         uunet!w3vh!rolfe             | Rolfe TessemINTERNET:
[e-mail]            | P.O. Box 793AMPRNET:
[e-mail] [44.44.0.2]| Great Barrington, MA
01230PACKET RADIO: w3vh@wa2pvv             | (413)
528-5966------------------------------Date: 12 Nov 89 22:52:55
GMTFrom: ka9q.bellcore.com![e-mail]  (Phil
Karn)Subject: NEPRAIn article <[e-mail]>
[e-mail] (EUGENE BALINSKI) writes:>Of course, if
CALLSIGN VERIFICATION is enabled on THE NET or NET ROM node, >a
KA-NODE with an identifier such as NASHUA or HUDSON, cannot be
connected >to, since it is not on the NET ROM or THE NET's list
of other THE NET or NET >ROM calls and aliases. Furthermore, if
DIGIPEATing is disabled at those >sites along, there is no way
to get past the CALLSIGN VERIFICATION process, >since a CONNECT
NASHUA VIA MTUNC2 would not work. That also effectively
>disables gateway such as NASHGT.I, for one, would dearly love
to squash the practice of putting "mnemonicidentifiers" into
AX.25 address fields. It was bad enough when NET/ROM nodesdid
it, but if I understand you correctly, this broken practice has
nowspread to other entities (e.g., KA-nodes).The address fields
in AX.25 packets are intended for bona-fide amateur
radiocallsigns. Among other things, they constitute legal IDs
for our packets."Spoofing" other station's callsigns or using
pseudo-IDs can only invitetrouble.Confusion as to the REAL
callsign of the station actually sending aparticular packet on a
crowded channel is only one such problem. Thepractice also
complicates the development of new algorithms for automaticlink
quality analysis (if a station uses multiple IDs in its packets,
itwill appear as multiple stations to the link quality
monitor.)The root problem is the inadequacy of the underlying
protocols. Each newgeneration of computer networkers seems to
learn anew about the importanceof end-to-end design and the need
to keep names and addresses distinct, butthere is no way to do
this with "plain vanilla" AX.25 and
NET/ROM.Phil------------------------------Date: 14 Nov 89
12:58:37 GMTFrom: bbn.com![e-mail]  (Martin
Grossman)Subject: upgrade info neededMy Brother (KA1PPG Needham
Ma.) runs packet with a MFJ 1270B hooked uptoan IBM AT.He just
got a new chip for the MFJ that turns it into a mini BBS
whereyou can leave upto 99 messages (Thats with the IBM turned
off!!!).Here's the problem.....It only allows messages to be
stored in 8K of theRAM even thou it has 32K available and he
doesn't want to leave the AT onall the time.Does anyone know how
to let it use more than 8K of the RAM?PS I looked in side many
months ago and I think it was an Z80 CPU.   If thats true then
does anyone have source code the the EPROMS   that I could
modify (I have a Z80/8080 compiler and EPROM burner   at my home
on an IBM)            email to    grossman@bbn            or            call me
at    [phone] (Martin Grossman)            or            call KA1PPG
at    [phone] (Neil
Grossman)------------------------------Date: 12 Nov 89 16:00:15
GMTFrom: att!cbnewsc![e-mail]  (Peter
Fales)Subject: What is this newsgroup all about? (Introduction
for a newcomer?)In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (Peter J. Dotzauer) writes:> Dear
ham-radio.packeteers:> > When I stumbled into your newsgroup and
started reading, I didn't understand> much, so can you provide
some kind of WELCOME posting that introduces new> readers to
this group?I second this.   It seems like there must be new
readers coming alongall the time, and it would be nice if there
was some way of getting up tospeed.  For my part, a lot of the
traffic in this group is difficultto understand.In the
"unix-pc.general" newsgroup, someone has taken it upon
themselvesto periodically post a list of "common questions and
answers" for beginners.-- Peter Fales            AT&T, Room
5B-420N9IYJ                2000 N. Naperville
Rd.UUCP:    ...att!peter.fales    Naperville, IL 60566Domain:
[e-mail]    work:    (312)
979-8031------------------------------Date: Mon, 13 Nov 89
17:28:08 GMTFrom: r p gordon
<[e-mail]>Hi,  Could
someone please inform me as to where I can obtain a copy of  Bob
Clements WD8003e driver in 'C' (or anyone else's for that
matter!).    Thanks in advance,     Ray Gordon.
[e-mail]
G1XRN------------------------------End of PACKET-RADIO Digest
V89 Issue #231*****************************************17-Nov-89
12:22:10-MST,11885;000000000000Return-Path:
<[e-mail]>Date: Fri, 17 Nov
89 12:15:34 MSTFrom:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: PACKET-RADIO Digest
V89 #232To: [e-mail]-RADIO
Digest         Fri, 17 Nov 89       Volume 89 : Issue 232Today's
Topics:                               DIGICOM
       KA9Q and the KAM                           NTS H&W
traffic                     PK-232 prices - info request
         TAPR 9600 RAdio/Modems??? (2 msgs)
want info on PC
attachment-------------------------------------------------------
---------------Date: Fri, 17 Nov 89 09:51:34 MEZFrom:
[e-mail]: DIGICOM>Date: 13
Nov 89 17:06:00 GMT>From:>
mailrus|jarvis.csri.toronto.edu|utgpu|utzoo|mnetor|tmsoft|masnet|
canremote|cli> [e-mail]  (CLINTON
EVANS)>Subject: Digicom>>Does anyone have experience of the
Digicom packet system for the C64?>How does it compare with a
TNC?  Are there any magazine articles,>...( No chance for a
direct reply, my mail bounced. So here  goes ... )If you compare
DIGICOM to a TNC you should take a close look to therelease
number. Some DC releases are named 4.** but these are
patchedversions, because the 'official' newest release is 3.5
and availablesince about two weeks. I met Flori, DL8MBT ( the
originator of DIGICOM)last saturday and he told me that even the
 DAMA features are includedin this current release ( see the
newest proceedings ). Plus furtherenhancements. An english
version of the new user manual is undertranslation right now and
will be available soon.Detlef ( DK4EG @ DK0MAV
).------------------------------Date: 14 Nov 89 18:58:38
GMTFrom: mitel!sce!cognos!dgbt![e-mail]  (Barry
Mclarnon DGBT/DIP)Subject: KA9Q and the KAMI've been asked by
someone for assistance in running KA9Q NET using aKAM in KISS
mode.  Unfortunately, he is not local, so I can't go andlook at
his setup; nor do I have a KAM to play with.  Apparently he
canreceive on both ports, but is having trouble with
transmitting on theHF port.  I'd like to hear from anyone who is
familiar with using theKAM with NET.73, Barry VE3JF-- Barry
McLarnon    Communications Research Center    Ottawa, ON
CanadaUUCP: ...utzoo!bnr-vpa!bnr-rsc!dgbt!barry   INTERNET:
[e-mail]$erve: 71470,3651     Packet radio:
VE3JF @ VE3JF------------------------------Date: 16 Nov 89
23:19:24 GMTFrom: coherent!athertn![e-mail]  (Steve
Harding)Subject: NTS H&W trafficI had planned on posting this
sooner, but y'all know how it is.How to Prepare and Send Welfare
TrafficAs recent events in the San Francisco Bay area have
shown, all hams should knowhow to handle dister traffic.  These
are simple skills to learn.  Those of youinvolved in novice
classes should take the time to pass on these tips as a partof
your class.Disaster (or Health and Welfare) traffic should
always be sent in the NTSformat.  This way your message will
have an unique ID (your call and messagenumber) in case the
delivering opeator needs to contact you with a returnmessage or
a request for further information.  Remember, during a disaster
thetracing of people and deliving of messages will be
complicated by the disasteritself.Keep the message brief.  Use
the ARL ninteen radiogram whenver possible.  Over6000 pieces of
traffic were routed into and out of the Bay area in the
weekfollowing the earthquake.If the message includes a "call
back", include the name, address, and telephonenumber, if
possible.  This information can be used to direct a message
directlyto the originator.Sending Welfare Traffic via PacketAs
our experience here in northern California has shown, packet can
handlelarge volumes of traffic easily.  Each of the BBS sysops
can tell you somewonderful stories about their own situation,
but the traffic was quicklyrouted.Use the following as a guide
to sending welfare traffic on packet:As with any NTS traffic,
use the ST command to enter your message into the BBS.Use the
ZIP @ NTSXX format whenever possible.  If you don't know the
zipcode,look it up, or call your local post office.  Using the
zipcode is moreimportant when sending welfare traffic, as some
where along the line (mostlikely in the disaster area) someone
will have to plug the zipcode into theproper field.  This will
delay your message and create extra work for abeleagured sysop
in the disaster area.An example of a correct entry is:ST 97140 @
NTSORIf it is impossible to get the zipcode, route the message
to NTSXX @ NTSXX,where XX is the 2-letter postal code.  For
example, to send a message toColorado, you would useST NTSCO @
NTSCOWhen the BBS asks for the Subject of your message, the
normal form is:QTC <city phone>.  Include enough of the phone
number so the delivering stationcan ascertain whether it is a
call that can be easily made from his or herlocation.  Often the
prefix is sufficient.Do not book welfare traffic.  Once into the
disaster area, an overworked sysopwill have to break down the
book and route the individual pieces of traffic.This will delay
your traffic.Rule of ThumbHams are extremely busy in the
disaster area.  Many of our qualified NTSoperators are also
involved in ARES and RACES programs, so welfare traffic maynot
be high on their priority list.  Unskilled operators will step
in and helpas much as they can.Make it easy on the delivering
station (and those stations handling yourtraffic along the way).
 Do your homework.  Include as much information aspossible about
the addressee and the signator.  Your chances of getting
yourwelfare message delivered (and a possible answer) will
increase dramatically.Steve - KA6ETB @ N6LDL -
[e-mail] - NTS NCN Packet
Manager------------------------------Date: 17 Nov 89 08:21:40
GMTFrom: shelby!csli![e-mail]  (Goh Kawai)Subject:
PK-232 prices - info requestI want a PK-232 tnc... Thought about
buying one from AEA, but noticed that Heath has a kit version
that sells for $289.90 including technical manual.  Is this a
good deal?  Can I buy an AEA assembled tnc for less?  if so,
where?  All info appreciated...Incidentally, if anyone in the
San Francisco bay area wants to sell his or hers PK-232, I'd be
interested.>goh<[e-mail]
(arpanet)------------------------------Date: 16 Nov 89 23:43:13
GMTFrom: [e-mail]: TAPR 9600
RAdio/Modems???Comment: Processed by UWGATEto:
[e-mail] know the status of the TAPR
9600 baud radio/modem combo they wereto be releasing??  I am
especially interested in the possibility of makingthem work full
duplex.  I have a frequency pair assigned for a 1200 baudFDuplex
440 repeater, but why bother??  I applied to be a beta tester
forthe TAPR 9600 PacketRadio but I guess I'm just not cooool
enough.Also, does anyone know if the Tapr 9600's have to be
tuned TO each other(in pairs)?? Or, can remote nodes be built up
with a scope and freq. counter?I know this is Phil bait :-)..
I'll have 1000's of memo's telling meto get 56k modems..  The
trick is to make the whole thing simple andaffordable to enough
people.  Really I just want a good backbone between3 or 4 major
cities, NO hidden terminals, and relatively few (if any) hops.No
doubt the traffic at the far ends will be 1200 baud till I'm old
enough toretire..The 440 stick, fed with 7/8" Heliax is ALREADY
up and WAITING (120' above theBaraboo, Wi.
bluffs).Well?[e-mail] 128.104.198.10
INTERNETPat, KD9UU608-255-3596
Eves.------------------------------Date: 17 Nov 89 07:53:12
GMTFrom: ka9q.bellcore.com![e-mail]  (Phil
Karn)Subject: TAPR 9600 RAdio/Modems???>Anyone know the status
of the TAPR 9600 baud radio/modem combo they were>to be
releasing??It's still being worked on, but it's taking longer
than expected to get outinto Beta test. You should be aware, by
the way, that only a 2m radio isunder development.  In my
opinion that effectively rules out full duplex,since crossband
operation is by far the easiest way to get full duplex.>I know
this is Phil bait :-).. I'll have 1000's of memo's telling me>to
get 56k modems..  The trick is to make the whole thing simple
and>affordable to enough people.Well you got me. Here's memo
1001. :-) Because I'm a Director of TAPR I havebeen previously
reluctant to comment publicly on the TAPR 9600 baud radio,but I
do have to say that I don't understand why so many people who
expressso much interest in it can't get interested in the WA4DSY
56k unit. In myopinion the latter is much more suitable for
serious high speed packetoperation, for the following reasons:1.
The design is highly modular. You can build independent transmit
andreceive sections, and they can be on any band you choose.2.
The transmitter generates MSK instead of noncoherent FSK. This
results ina very clean, efficient and stable spectrum, and the
"deviation" adjustmentis inherently exactly correct. The
adjustments that you do have to make arevery easy to do with a
scope; you don't need a calibrated deviation meter.3. Even
though the current WA4DSY demod design uses a
noncoherentdiscriminator (i.e., it treats the incoming MSK
signal as though it werenoncoherent FSK) the transmitter's use
of MSK holds open the option of laterbuilding true coherent
demodulators. These would give a 5-6 dB improvementin link
performance with NO changes required at the transmitter. This
optionis precluded by modulators like the TAPR modem that just
FM a crystalnoncoherently.4. The WA4DSY modem runs 5.8 times as
fast as the 9600 modem, but for a lotless than 5.8 times the
cost! I don't know how the 9600 modem is going toprice out, but
I would be very surprised if it ends up being less than 75%of
the cost of a complete WA4DSY modem.5. And, last but not least,
the WA4DSY modem design has been proven inactual use for several
years, and it is available NOW! It's not at alldifficult to
assemble and check out; see my review in the October issueof
73.I certainly don't oppose the TAPR 9600 baud packet radio
modem project; Godknows that even it would be a vast improvement
over 1200 baud Bell 202 toneson 2m, and it would be a waste to
slow down a perfectly good WA4DSY modem tofit it into the 2m 20
KHz bandwidth limit. But if you're going to operate onbands
above 2m (which, in my opinion, is unsuitable for serious packet
radiooperation anyway) then the WA4DSY modem is the clear
choice.Phil------------------------------Date: 17 Nov 89
01:39:29 GMTFrom:
swrinde!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!uwm.edu!ux
1.cso.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu![e-mail]: want info
on PC attachmentHas anyone collected a summary of:1.  Modem
cards, having ready connection between CPU and radio for ham
radio    uses,2.  High speed serial port cards,3.  External
modems for #2 and ham radio (not TNC's unless direct modem
capability is included),for IBM PC and clones using 8 bit or
preferabbly 16 bit bus?  Comments andsuggestions are also
welcome.  Anticipated machine will being either an Amiga2000
with IBM Bridgecard (AT bus) or a CompuAdd 316s (386SX).--Phil
Howard,
KA9WGN--<[e-mail]>------------------------------End
of PACKET-RADIO Digest V89 Issue
#232*****************************************17-Nov-89
14:22:02-MST,13592;000000000000Return-Path:
<[e-mail]>Date: Fri, 17 Nov
89 14:15:19 MSTFrom:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: PACKET-RADIO Digest
V89 #233To: [e-mail]-RADIO
Digest         Fri, 17 Nov 89       Volume 89 : Issue 233Today's
Topics:                     Returned mail: User
unknown----------------------------------------------------------
------------Date: Fri, 17 Nov 89 12:38:13 -0800From:
[e-mail] (Mail Delivery Subsystem)Subject:
Returned mail: User unknown   ----- Transcript of session
follows -----While talking to /usr/bin/mail11v3:>>> RCPT
To:<dpdmai::hicks><<< 550-DPDMAI::HICKS; %MAIL-E-NOSUCHUSR, no
such user HICKS at node DPD04<<< 550550
<[e-mail]>... User unknown   ----- Unsent
message follows -----Received: by decwrl.dec.com; id AA22529;
Fri, 17 Nov 89 12:38:13 -0800Message-Id:
<[e-mail]>Date: 17 Nov 89 12:27:00
PDTFrom: [e-mail]:
PACKET-RADIO Digest V89 #232To: "hicks"
<[e-mail]>Return-Path:
<@consrt.rok.com,@wsmr-simtel20.army.mil:packet-radio-request@wsm
r-simtel20.army.mil>Received: from consrt.rok.com by
consrt.rok.com with SMTP ;           Fri, 17 Nov 89 11:26:25
PDTReceived: from lcs.mit.edu by consrt.rok.com with SMTP ;
     Fri, 17 Nov 89 11:26:02 PDTReceived: from
WSMR-SIMTEL20.ARMY.MIL by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21850;
  17 Nov 89 15:21 ESTDate: Fri, 17 Nov 89 12:15:34 MSTFrom:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: PACKET-RADIO Digest
V89 #232To: [e-mail]-ID:
<[e-mail]>PACKET-RADIO Digest
   Fri, 17 Nov 89       Volume 89 : Issue 232Today's Topics:
                          DIGICOM                           KA9Q
and the KAM                           NTS H&W traffic
         PK-232 prices - info request                  TAPR 9600
RAdio/Modems??? (2 msgs)                      want info on PC
attachment-------------------------------------------------------
---------------Date: Fri, 17 Nov 89 09:51:34 MEZFrom:
[e-mail]: DIGICOM>Date: 13
Nov 89 17:06:00 GMT>From:>
mailrus|jarvis.csri.toronto.edu|utgpu|utzoo|mnetor|tmsoft|masnet|
canremote|cli> [e-mail]  (CLINTON
EVANS)>Subject: Digicom>>Does anyone have experience of the
Digicom packet system for the C64?>How does it compare with a
TNC?  Are there any magazine articles,>...( No chance for a
direct reply, my mail bounced. So here  goes ... )If you compare
DIGICOM to a TNC you should take a close look to therelease
number. Some DC releases are named 4.** but these are
patchedversions, because the 'official' newest release is 3.5
and availablesince about two weeks. I met Flori, DL8MBT ( the
originator of DIGICOM)last saturday and he told me that even the
 DAMA features are includedin this current release ( see the
newest proceedings ). Plus furtherenhancements. An english
version of the new user manual is undertranslation right now and
will be available soon.Detlef ( DK4EG @ DK0MAV
).------------------------------Date: 14 Nov 89 18:58:38
GMTFrom: mitel!sce!cognos!dgbt![e-mail]  (Barry
Mclarnon DGBT/DIP)Subject: KA9Q and the KAMI've been asked by
someone for assistance in running KA9Q NET using aKAM in KISS
mode.  Unfortunately, he is not local, so I can't go andlook at
his setup; nor do I have a KAM to play with.  Apparently he
canreceive on both ports, but is having trouble with
transmitting on theHF port.  I'd like to hear from anyone who is
familiar with using theKAM with NET.73, Barry VE3JF-- Barry
McLarnon    Communications Research Center    Ottawa, ON
CanadaUUCP: ...utzoo!bnr-vpa!bnr-rsc!dgbt!barry   INTERNET:
[e-mail]$erve: 71470,3651     Packet radio:
VE3JF @ VE3JF------------------------------Date: 16 Nov 89
23:19:24 GMTFrom: coherent!athertn![e-mail]  (Steve
Harding)Subject: NTS H&W trafficI had planned on posting this
sooner, but y'all know how it is.How to Prepare and Send Welfare
TrafficAs recent events in the San Francisco Bay area have
shown, all hams should knowhow to handle dister traffic.  These
are simple skills to learn.  Those of youinvolved in novice
classes should take the time to pass on these tips as a partof
your class.Disaster (or Health and Welfare) traffic should
always be sent in the NTSformat.  This way your message will
have an unique ID (your call and messagenumber) in case the
delivering opeator needs to contact you with a returnmessage or
a request for further information.  Remember, during a disaster
thetracing of people and deliving of messages will be
complicated by the disasteritself.Keep the message brief.  Use
the ARL ninteen radiogram whenver possible.  Over6000 pieces of
traffic were routed into and out of the Bay area in the
weekfollowing the earthquake.If the message includes a "call
back", include the name, address, and telephonenumber, if
possible.  This information can be used to direct a message
directlyto the originator.Sending Welfare Traffic via PacketAs
our experience here in northern California has shown, packet can
handlelarge volumes of traffic easily.  Each of the BBS sysops
can tell you somewonderful stories about their own situation,
but the traffic was quicklyrouted.Use the following as a guide
to sending welfare traffic on packet:As with any NTS traffic,
use the ST command to enter your message into the BBS.Use the
ZIP @ NTSXX format whenever possible.  If you don't know the
zipcode,look it up, or call your local post office.  Using the
zipcode is moreimportant when sending welfare traffic, as some
where along the line (mostlikely in the disaster area) someone
will have to plug the zipcode into theproper field.  This will
delay your message and create extra work for abeleagured sysop
in the disaster area.An example of a correct entry is:ST 97140 @
NTSORIf it is impossible to get the zipcode, route the message
to NTSXX @ NTSXX,where XX is the 2-letter postal code.  For
example, to send a message toColorado, you would useST NTSCO @
NTSCOWhen the BBS asks for the Subject of your message, the
normal form is:QTC <city phone>.  Include enough of the phone
number so the delivering stationcan ascertain whether it is a
call that can be easily made from his or herlocation.  Often the
prefix is sufficient.Do not book welfare traffic.  Once into the
disaster area, an overworked sysopwill have to break down the
book and route the individual pieces of traffic.This will delay
your traffic.Rule of ThumbHams are extremely busy in the
disaster area.  Many of our qualified NTSoperators are also
involved in ARES and RACES programs, so welfare traffic maynot
be high on their priority list.  Unskilled operators will step
in and helpas much as they can.Make it easy on the delivering
station (and those stations handling yourtraffic along the way).
 Do your homework.  Include as much information aspossible about
the addressee and the signator.  Your chances of getting
yourwelfare message delivered (and a possible answer) will
increase dramatically.Steve - KA6ETB @ N6LDL -
[e-mail] - NTS NCN Packet
Manager------------------------------Date: 17 Nov 89 08:21:40
GMTFrom: shelby!csli![e-mail]  (Goh Kawai)Subject:
PK-232 prices - info requestI want a PK-232 tnc... Thought about
buying one from AEA, but noticed that Heath has a kit version
that sells for $289.90 including technical manual.  Is this a
good deal?  Can I buy an AEA assembled tnc for less?  if so,
where?  All info appreciated...Incidentally, if anyone in the
San Francisco bay area wants to sell his or hers PK-232, I'd be
interested.>goh<[e-mail]
(arpanet)------------------------------Date: 16 Nov 89 23:43:13
GMTFrom: [e-mail]: TAPR 9600
RAdio/Modems???Comment: Processed by UWGATEto:
[e-mail] know the status of the TAPR
9600 baud radio/modem combo they wereto be releasing??  I am
especially interested in the possibility of makingthem work full
duplex.  I have a frequency pair assigned for a 1200 baudFDuplex
440 repeater, but why bother??  I applied to be a beta tester
forthe TAPR 9600 PacketRadio but I guess I'm just not cooool
enough.Also, does anyone know if the Tapr 9600's have to be
tuned TO each other(in pairs)?? Or, can remote nodes be built up
with a scope and freq. counter?I know this is Phil bait :-)..
I'll have 1000's of memo's telling meto get 56k modems..  The
trick is to make the whole thing simple andaffordable to enough
people.  Really I just want a good backbone between3 or 4 major
cities, NO hidden terminals, and relatively few (if any) hops.No
doubt the traffic at the far ends will be 1200 baud till I'm old
enough toretire..The 440 stick, fed with 7/8" Heliax is ALREADY
up and WAITING (120' above theBaraboo, Wi.
bluffs).Well?[e-mail] 128.104.198.10
INTERNETPat, KD9UU608-255-3596
Eves.------------------------------Date: 17 Nov 89 07:53:12
GMTFrom: ka9q.bellcore.com![e-mail]  (Phil
Karn)Subject: TAPR 9600 RAdio/Modems???>Anyone know the status
of the TAPR 9600 baud radio/modem combo they were>to be
releasing??It's still being worked on, but it's taking longer
than expected to get outinto Beta test. You should be aware, by
the way, that only a 2m radio isunder development.  In my
opinion that effectively rules out full duplex,since crossband
operation is by far the easiest way to get full duplex.>I know
this is Phil bait :-).. I'll have 1000's of memo's telling me>to
get 56k modems..  The trick is to make the whole thing simple
and>affordable to enough people.Well you got me. Here's memo
1001. :-) Because I'm a Director of TAPR I havebeen previously
reluctant to comment publicly on the TAPR 9600 baud radio,but I
do have to say that I don't understand why so many people who
expressso much interest in it can't get interested in the WA4DSY
56k unit. In myopinion the latter is much more suitable for
serious high speed packetoperation, for the following reasons:1.
The design is highly modular. You can build independent transmit
andreceive sections, and they can be on any band you choose.2.
The transmitter generates MSK instead of noncoherent FSK. This
results ina very clean, efficient and stable spectrum, and the
"deviation" adjustmentis inherently exactly correct. The
adjustments that you do have to make arevery easy to do with a
scope; you don't need a calibrated deviation meter.3. Even
though the current WA4DSY demod design uses a
noncoherentdiscriminator (i.e., it treats the incoming MSK
signal as though it werenoncoherent FSK) the transmitter's use
of MSK holds open the option of laterbuilding true coherent
demodulators. These would give a 5-6 dB improvementin link
performance with NO changes required at the transmitter. This
optionis precluded by modulators like the TAPR modem that just
FM a crystalnoncoherently.4. The WA4DSY modem runs 5.8 times as
fast as the 9600 modem, but for a lotless than 5.8 times the
cost! I don't know how the 9600 modem is going toprice out, but
I would be very surprised if it ends up being less than 75%of
the cost of a complete WA4DSY modem.5. And, last but not least,
the WA4DSY modem design has been proven inactual use for several
years, and it is available NOW! It's not at alldifficult to
assemble and check out; see my review in the October issueof
73.I certainly don't oppose the TAPR 9600 baud packet radio
modem project; Godknows that even it would be a vast improvement
over 1200 baud Bell 202 toneson 2m, and it would be a waste to
slow down a perfectly good WA4DSY modem tofit it into the 2m 20
KHz bandwidth limit. But if you're going to operate onbands
above 2m (which, in my opinion, is unsuitable for serious packet
radiooperation anyway) then the WA4DSY modem is the clear
choice.Phil------------------------------Date: 17 Nov 89
01:39:29 GMTFrom:
swrinde!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!uwm.edu!ux
1.cso.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu![e-mail]: want info
on PC attachmentHas anyone collected a summary of:1.  Modem
cards, having ready connection between CPU and radio for ham
radio    uses,2.  High speed serial port cards,3.  External
modems for #2 and ham radio (not TNC's unless direct modem
capability is included),for IBM PC and clones using 8 bit or
preferabbly 16 bit bus?  Comments andsuggestions are also
welcome.  Anticipated machine will being either an Amiga2000
with IBM Bridgecard (AT bus) or a CompuAdd 316s (386SX).--Phil
Howard,
KA9WGN--<[e-mail]>------------------------------End
of PACKET-RADIO Digest V89 Issue
#232*****************************************--------------------
----------End of PACKET-RADIO Digest V89 Issue
#233*****************************************17-Nov-89
17:22:22-MST,17757;000000000000Return-Path:
<[e-mail]>Date: Fri, 17 Nov
89 17:15:27 MSTFrom:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: PACKET-RADIO Digest
V89 #234To: [e-mail]-RADIO
Digest         Fri, 17 Nov 89       Volume 89 : Issue 234Today's
Topics:                         Atari ST BM program
             BM for Atari ST                       Radio built
into PeeCee?                     Returned mail: User
unknown----------------------------------------------------------
------------Date: 16 Nov 89 17:37:55 GMTFrom:
hpda!hpcuhb!hp-ses!hpcc01!hpccc!hpl-opus!hpnmdla![e-mail]
rkeley.EDU  (Glenn Elmore)Subject: Atari ST BM programYes, I
have a copy (October 89?) of BM.TOS which seems to work fineon
my ST and has quite a few additional features.I got it off a
diskette which came from Rob PE1CHL himself. I don'tremember if
the archived version, 8908142st.arc, had it or not.I suspect not
if that is the same version you are talking about.It should be
available by anonymous ftp fromcol.hp.com  under
ka9q/pe1chl/890814st.arcand docs under
ka9q/pe1chl/net_doc.arcGlenn Elmore -N6GN-N6GN @ K3MC
[e-mail]@nmd.hpcom
------------------------------Date: 16 Nov 89 17:40:39 GMTFrom:
hpda!hpcuhb!hp-ses!hpcc01!hpccc!hpl-opus!hpnmdla![e-mail]
rkeley.EDU  (Glenn Elmore)Subject: BM for Atari STDiana,  I
forgot to mention that I will put the new working version
ofbm.tos on col.hp.com ASAP. Also I have schematics for
Rob's8530 and modem circuitry.Glenn Elmore -N6GN-N6GN @ K3MC
 [e-mail]@nmd.hpcom
------------------------------Date: 17 Nov 89 21:25:46 GMTFrom:
shlump.nac.dec.com!delni.enet.dec.com![e-mail]
ject: Radio built into PeeCee?Okay, gang, here's what I think
would be a Neat Project.Rather than have a PC emulating a
terminal talking to a TNC talking to a radio, we can of course
have the PC act as the TNC and talk straightto the radio.  HAPN
does that now, which is Good.  Now the tough part.Let's buld a
(packet) radio into the PeeCee.  Your basic Clone has apretty
good power supply (8 A at +12V, 20A at +5 V for your
AT-class200w).  Much of the logic on a synthesizer is decoding
the control,which sounds like a natural PC application.  Build
it all on one and youcan simplify the interface to the
modulator, etc. The "full sized" PC card is pretty big, and
there are drive bays if youneed more space.  The tough part, of
course, is shielding: You have toprotect the front end from all
that noise inside the FCC-compliant PCcase.  Hey, what's a
little challenge?Any ideas?    fred
k1io------------------------------Date: Fri, 17 Nov 89 15:35:06
-0800From: [e-mail] (Mail Delivery
Subsystem)Subject: Returned mail: User unknown   -----
Transcript of session follows -----While talking to
/usr/bin/mail11v3:>>> RCPT To:<dpdmai::hicks><<<
550-DPDMAI::HICKS; %MAIL-E-NOSUCHUSR, no such user HICKS at node
DPD03<<< 550550 <[e-mail]>... User unknown
----- Unsent message follows -----Received: by decwrl.dec.com;
id AA11641; Fri, 17 Nov 89 15:35:06 -0800Message-Id:
<[e-mail]>Date: 17 Nov 89 15:31:00
PDTFrom: [e-mail]:
PACKET-RADIO Digest V89 #233To: "hicks"
<[e-mail]>Return-Path:
<@consrt.rok.com,@wsmr-simtel20.army.mil:packet-radio-request@wsm
r-simtel20.army.mil>Received: from consrt.rok.com by
consrt.rok.com with SMTP ;           Fri, 17 Nov 89 14:28:59
PDTReceived: from lcs.mit.edu by consrt.rok.com with SMTP ;
     Fri, 17 Nov 89 14:26:06 PDTReceived: by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu
id aa23025; 17 Nov 89 18:18 ESTReceived: from
WSMR-SIMTEL20.ARMY.MIL by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa14781;
  17 Nov 89 18:00 ESTDate: Fri, 17 Nov 89 14:15:19 MSTFrom:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: PACKET-RADIO Digest
V89 #233To: [e-mail]-ID:
<[e-mail]>PACKET-RADIO Digest
   Fri, 17 Nov 89       Volume 89 : Issue 233Today's Topics:
                Returned mail: User
unknown----------------------------------------------------------
------------Date: Fri, 17 Nov 89 12:38:13 -0800From:
[e-mail] (Mail Delivery Subsystem)Subject:
Returned mail: User unknown   ----- Transcript of session
follows -----While talking to /usr/bin/mail11v3:>>> RCPT
To:<dpdmai::hicks><<< 550-DPDMAI::HICKS; %MAIL-E-NOSUCHUSR, no
such user HICKS at node DPD04<<< 550550
<[e-mail]>... User unknown   ----- Unsent
message follows -----Received: by decwrl.dec.com; id AA22529;
Fri, 17 Nov 89 12:38:13 -0800Message-Id:
<[e-mail]>Date: 17 Nov 89 12:27:00
PDTFrom: [e-mail]:
PACKET-RADIO Digest V89 #232To: "hicks"
<[e-mail]>Return-Path:
<@consrt.rok.com,@wsmr-simtel20.army.mil:packet-radio-request@wsm
r-simtel20.army.mil>Received: from consrt.rok.com by
consrt.rok.com with SMTP ;           Fri, 17 Nov 89 11:26:25
PDTReceived: from lcs.mit.edu by consrt.rok.com with SMTP ;
     Fri, 17 Nov 89 11:26:02 PDTReceived: from
WSMR-SIMTEL20.ARMY.MIL by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21850;
  17 Nov 89 15:21 ESTDate: Fri, 17 Nov 89 12:15:34 MSTFrom:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: PACKET-RADIO Digest
V89 #232To: [e-mail]-ID:
<[e-mail]>PACKET-RADIO Digest
   Fri, 17 Nov 89       Volume 89 : Issue 232Today's Topics:
                          DIGICOM                           KA9Q
and the KAM                           NTS H&W traffic
         PK-232 prices - info request                  TAPR 9600
RAdio/Modems??? (2 msgs)                      want info on PC
attachment-------------------------------------------------------
---------------Date: Fri, 17 Nov 89 09:51:34 MEZFrom:
[e-mail]: DIGICOM>Date: 13
Nov 89 17:06:00 GMT>From:>
mailrus|jarvis.csri.toronto.edu|utgpu|utzoo|mnetor|tmsoft|masnet|
canremote|cli> [e-mail]  (CLINTON
EVANS)>Subject: Digicom>>Does anyone have experience of the
Digicom packet system for the C64?>How does it compare with a
TNC?  Are there any magazine articles,>...( No chance for a
direct reply, my mail bounced. So here  goes ... )If you compare
DIGICOM to a TNC you should take a close look to therelease
number. Some DC releases are named 4.** but these are
patchedversions, because the 'official' newest release is 3.5
and availablesince about two weeks. I met Flori, DL8MBT ( the
originator of DIGICOM)last saturday and he told me that even the
 DAMA features are includedin this current release ( see the
newest proceedings ). Plus furtherenhancements. An english
version of the new user manual is undertranslation right now and
will be available soon.Detlef ( DK4EG @ DK0MAV
).------------------------------Date: 14 Nov 89 18:58:38
GMTFrom: mitel!sce!cognos!dgbt![e-mail]  (Barry
Mclarnon DGBT/DIP)Subject: KA9Q and the KAMI've been asked by
someone for assistance in running KA9Q NET using aKAM in KISS
mode.  Unfortunately, he is not local, so I can't go andlook at
his setup; nor do I have a KAM to play with.  Apparently he
canreceive on both ports, but is having trouble with
transmitting on theHF port.  I'd like to hear from anyone who is
familiar with using theKAM with NET.73, Barry VE3JF-- Barry
McLarnon    Communications Research Center    Ottawa, ON
CanadaUUCP: ...utzoo!bnr-vpa!bnr-rsc!dgbt!barry   INTERNET:
[e-mail]$erve: 71470,3651     Packet radio:
VE3JF @ VE3JF------------------------------Date: 16 Nov 89
23:19:24 GMTFrom: coherent!athertn![e-mail]  (Steve
Harding)Subject: NTS H&W trafficI had planned on posting this
sooner, but y'all know how it is.How to Prepare and Send Welfare
TrafficAs recent events in the San Francisco Bay area have
shown, all hams should knowhow to handle dister traffic.  These
are simple skills to learn.  Those of youinvolved in novice
classes should take the time to pass on these tips as a partof
your class.Disaster (or Health and Welfare) traffic should
always be sent in the NTSformat.  This way your message will
have an unique ID (your call and messagenumber) in case the
delivering opeator needs to contact you with a returnmessage or
a request for further information.  Remember, during a disaster
thetracing of people and deliving of messages will be
complicated by the disasteritself.Keep the message brief.  Use
the ARL ninteen radiogram whenver possible.  Over6000 pieces of
traffic were routed into and out of the Bay area in the
weekfollowing the earthquake.If the message includes a "call
back", include the name, address, and telephonenumber, if
possible.  This information can be used to direct a message
directlyto the originator.Sending Welfare Traffic via PacketAs
our experience here in northern California has shown, packet can
handlelarge volumes of traffic easily.  Each of the BBS sysops
can tell you somewonderful stories about their own situation,
but the traffic was quicklyrouted.Use the following as a guide
to sending welfare traffic on packet:As with any NTS traffic,
use the ST command to enter your message into the BBS.Use the
ZIP @ NTSXX format whenever possible.  If you don't know the
zipcode,look it up, or call your local post office.  Using the
zipcode is moreimportant when sending welfare traffic, as some
where along the line (mostlikely in the disaster area) someone
will have to plug the zipcode into theproper field.  This will
delay your message and create extra work for abeleagured sysop
in the disaster area.An example of a correct entry is:ST 97140 @
NTSORIf it is impossible to get the zipcode, route the message
to NTSXX @ NTSXX,where XX is the 2-letter postal code.  For
example, to send a message toColorado, you would useST NTSCO @
NTSCOWhen the BBS asks for the Subject of your message, the
normal form is:QTC <city phone>.  Include enough of the phone
number so the delivering stationcan ascertain whether it is a
call that can be easily made from his or herlocation.  Often the
prefix is sufficient.Do not book welfare traffic.  Once into the
disaster area, an overworked sysopwill have to break down the
book and route the individual pieces of traffic.This will delay
your traffic.Rule of ThumbHams are extremely busy in the
disaster area.  Many of our qualified NTSoperators are also
involved in ARES and RACES programs, so welfare traffic maynot
be high on their priority list.  Unskilled operators will step
in and helpas much as they can.Make it easy on the delivering
station (and those stations handling yourtraffic along the way).
 Do your homework.  Include as much information aspossible about
the addressee and the signator.  Your chances of getting
yourwelfare message delivered (and a possible answer) will
increase dramatically.Steve - KA6ETB @ N6LDL -
[e-mail] - NTS NCN Packet
Manager------------------------------Date: 17 Nov 89 08:21:40
GMTFrom: shelby!csli![e-mail]  (Goh Kawai)Subject:
PK-232 prices - info requestI want a PK-232 tnc... Thought about
buying one from AEA, but noticed that Heath has a kit version
that sells for $289.90 including technical manual.  Is this a
good deal?  Can I buy an AEA assembled tnc for less?  if so,
where?  All info appreciated...Incidentally, if anyone in the
San Francisco bay area wants to sell his or hers PK-232, I'd be
interested.>goh<[e-mail]
(arpanet)------------------------------Date: 16 Nov 89 23:43:13
GMTFrom: [e-mail]: TAPR 9600
RAdio/Modems???Comment: Processed by UWGATEto:
[e-mail] know the status of the TAPR
9600 baud radio/modem combo they wereto be releasing??  I am
especially interested in the possibility of makingthem work full
duplex.  I have a frequency pair assigned for a 1200 baudFDuplex
440 repeater, but why bother??  I applied to be a beta tester
forthe TAPR 9600 PacketRadio but I guess I'm just not cooool
enough.Also, does anyone know if the Tapr 9600's have to be
tuned TO each other(in pairs)?? Or, can remote nodes be built up
with a scope and freq. counter?I know this is Phil bait :-)..
I'll have 1000's of memo's telling meto get 56k modems..  The
trick is to make the whole thing simple andaffordable to enough
people.  Really I just want a good backbone between3 or 4 major
cities, NO hidden terminals, and relatively few (if any) hops.No
doubt the traffic at the far ends will be 1200 baud till I'm old
enough toretire..The 440 stick, fed with 7/8" Heliax is ALREADY
up and WAITING (120' above theBaraboo, Wi.
bluffs).Well?[e-mail] 128.104.198.10
INTERNETPat, KD9UU608-255-3596
Eves.------------------------------Date: 17 Nov 89 07:53:12
GMTFrom: ka9q.bellcore.com![e-mail]  (Phil
Karn)Subject: TAPR 9600 RAdio/Modems???>Anyone know the status
of the TAPR 9600 baud radio/modem combo they were>to be
releasing??It's still being worked on, but it's taking longer
than expected to get outinto Beta test. You should be aware, by
the way, that only a 2m radio isunder development.  In my
opinion that effectively rules out full duplex,since crossband
operation is by far the easiest way to get full duplex.>I know
this is Phil bait :-).. I'll have 1000's of memo's telling me>to
get 56k modems..  The trick is to make the whole thing simple
and>affordable to enough people.Well you got me. Here's memo
1001. :-) Because I'm a Director of TAPR I havebeen previously
reluctant to comment publicly on the TAPR 9600 baud radio,but I
do have to say that I don't understand why so many people who
expressso much interest in it can't get interested in the WA4DSY
56k unit. In myopinion the latter is much more suitable for
serious high speed packetoperation, for the following reasons:1.
The design is highly modular. You can build independent transmit
andreceive sections, and they can be on any band you choose.2.
The transmitter generates MSK instead of noncoherent FSK. This
results ina very clean, efficient and stable spectrum, and the
"deviation" adjustmentis inherently exactly correct. The
adjustments that you do have to make arevery easy to do with a
scope; you don't need a calibrated deviation meter.3. Even
though the current WA4DSY demod design uses a
noncoherentdiscriminator (i.e., it treats the incoming MSK
signal as though it werenoncoherent FSK) the transmitter's use
of MSK holds open the option of laterbuilding true coherent
demodulators. These would give a 5-6 dB improvementin link
performance with NO changes required at the transmitter. This
optionis precluded by modulators like the TAPR modem that just
FM a crystalnoncoherently.4. The WA4DSY modem runs 5.8 times as
fast as the 9600 modem, but for a lotless than 5.8 times the
cost! I don't know how the 9600 modem is going toprice out, but
I would be very surprised if it ends up being less than 75%of
the cost of a complete WA4DSY modem.5. And, last but not least,
the WA4DSY modem design has been proven inactual use for several
years, and it is available NOW! It's not at alldifficult to
assemble and check out; see my review in the October issueof
73.I certainly don't oppose the TAPR 9600 baud packet radio
modem project; Godknows that even it would be a vast improvement
over 1200 baud Bell 202 toneson 2m, and it would be a waste to
slow down a perfectly good WA4DSY modem tofit it into the 2m 20
KHz bandwidth limit. But if you're going to operate onbands
above 2m (which, in my opinion, is unsuitable for serious packet
radiooperation anyway) then the WA4DSY modem is the clear
choice.Phil------------------------------Date: 17 Nov 89
01:39:29 GMTFrom:
swrinde!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!uwm.edu!ux
1.cso.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu![e-mail]: want info
on PC attachmentHas anyone collected a summary of:1.  Modem
cards, having ready connection between CPU and radio for ham
radio    uses,2.  High speed serial port cards,3.  External
modems for #2 and ham radio (not TNC's unless direct modem
capability is included),for IBM PC and clones using 8 bit or
preferabbly 16 bit bus?  Comments andsuggestions are also
welcome.  Anticipated machine will being either an Amiga2000
with IBM Bridgecard (AT bus) or a CompuAdd 316s (386SX).--Phil
Howard,
KA9WGN--<[e-mail]>------------------------------End
of PACKET-RADIO Digest V89 Issue
#232*****************************************--------------------
----------End of PACKET-RADIO Digest V89 Issue
#233*****************************************--------------------
----------End of PACKET-RADIO Digest V89 Issue
#234*****************************************17-Nov-89
20:19:25-MST,19464;000000000000Return-Path:
<[e-mail]>Date: Fri, 17 Nov
89 20:16:04 MSTFrom:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: PACKET-RADIO Digest
V89 #235To: [e-mail]-RADIO
Digest         Fri, 17 Nov 89       Volume 89 : Issue 235Today's
Topics:                     Returned mail: User
unknown----------------------------------------------------------
------------Date: Fri, 17 Nov 89 18:26:00 -0800From:
[e-mail] (Mail Delivery Subsystem)Subject:
Returned mail: User unknown   ----- Transcript of session
follows -----While talking to /usr/bin/mail11v3:>>> RCPT
To:<dpdmai::hicks><<< 550-DPDMAI::HICKS; %MAIL-E-NOSUCHUSR, no
such user HICKS at node DPD20<<< 550550
<[e-mail]>... User unknown   ----- Unsent
message follows -----Received: by decwrl.dec.com; id AA27309;
Fri, 17 Nov 89 18:26:00 -0800Message-Id:
<[e-mail]>Date: 17 Nov 89 18:21:00
PDTFrom: [e-mail]:
PACKET-RADIO Digest V89 #234To: "hicks"
<[e-mail]>Return-Path:
<@consrt.rok.com,@wsmr-simtel20.army.mil:packet-radio-request@wsm
r-simtel20.army.mil>Received: from consrt.rok.com by
consrt.rok.com with SMTP ;           Fri, 17 Nov 89 17:20:18
PDTReceived: from lcs.mit.edu by consrt.rok.com with SMTP ;
     Fri, 17 Nov 89 17:18:06 PDTReceived: from
WSMR-SIMTEL20.ARMY.MIL by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa13929;
  17 Nov 89 21:13 ESTDate: Fri, 17 Nov 89 17:15:27 MSTFrom:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: PACKET-RADIO Digest
V89 #234To: [e-mail]-ID:
<[e-mail]>PACKET-RADIO Digest
   Fri, 17 Nov 89       Volume 89 : Issue 234Today's Topics:
                    Atari ST BM program
 BM for Atari ST                       Radio built into PeeCee?
                   Returned mail: User
unknown----------------------------------------------------------
------------Date: 16 Nov 89 17:37:55 GMTFrom:
hpda!hpcuhb!hp-ses!hpcc01!hpccc!hpl-opus!hpnmdla![e-mail]
rkeley.EDU  (Glenn Elmore)Subject: Atari ST BM programYes, I
have a copy (October 89?) of BM.TOS which seems to work fineon
my ST and has quite a few additional features.I got it off a
diskette which came from Rob PE1CHL himself. I don'tremember if
the archived version, 8908142st.arc, had it or not.I suspect not
if that is the same version you are talking about.It should be
available by anonymous ftp fromcol.hp.com  under
ka9q/pe1chl/890814st.arcand docs under
ka9q/pe1chl/net_doc.arcGlenn Elmore -N6GN-N6GN @ K3MC
[e-mail]@nmd.hpcom
------------------------------Date: 16 Nov 89 17:40:39 GMTFrom:
hpda!hpcuhb!hp-ses!hpcc01!hpccc!hpl-opus!hpnmdla![e-mail]
rkeley.EDU  (Glenn Elmore)Subject: BM for Atari STDiana,  I
forgot to mention that I will put the new working version
ofbm.tos on col.hp.com ASAP. Also I have schematics for
Rob's8530 and modem circuitry.Glenn Elmore -N6GN-N6GN @ K3MC
 [e-mail]@nmd.hpcom
------------------------------Date: 17 Nov 89 21:25:46 GMTFrom:
shlump.nac.dec.com!delni.enet.dec.com![e-mail]
ject: Radio built into PeeCee?Okay, gang, here's what I think
would be a Neat Project.Rather than have a PC emulating a
terminal talking to a TNC talking to a radio, we can of course
have the PC act as the TNC and talk straightto the radio.  HAPN
does that now, which is Good.  Now the tough part.Let's buld a
(packet) radio into the PeeCee.  Your basic Clone has apretty
good power supply (8 A at +12V, 20A at +5 V for your
AT-class200w).  Much of the logic on a synthesizer is decoding
the control,which sounds like a natural PC application.  Build
it all on one and youcan simplify the interface to the
modulator, etc. The "full sized" PC card is pretty big, and
there are drive bays if youneed more space.  The tough part, of
course, is shielding: You have toprotect the front end from all
that noise inside the FCC-compliant PCcase.  Hey, what's a
little challenge?Any ideas?    fred
k1io------------------------------Date: Fri, 17 Nov 89 15:35:06
-0800From: [e-mail] (Mail Delivery
Subsystem)Subject: Returned mail: User unknown   -----
Transcript of session follows -----While talking to
/usr/bin/mail11v3:>>> RCPT To:<dpdmai::hicks><<<
550-DPDMAI::HICKS; %MAIL-E-NOSUCHUSR, no such user HICKS at node
DPD03<<< 550550 <[e-mail]>... User unknown
----- Unsent message follows -----Received: by decwrl.dec.com;
id AA11641; Fri, 17 Nov 89 15:35:06 -0800Message-Id:
<[e-mail]>Date: 17 Nov 89 15:31:00
PDTFrom: [e-mail]:
PACKET-RADIO Digest V89 #233To: "hicks"
<[e-mail]>Return-Path:
<@consrt.rok.com,@wsmr-simtel20.army.mil:packet-radio-request@wsm
r-simtel20.army.mil>Received: from consrt.rok.com by
consrt.rok.com with SMTP ;           Fri, 17 Nov 89 14:28:59
PDTReceived: from lcs.mit.edu by consrt.rok.com with SMTP ;
     Fri, 17 Nov 89 14:26:06 PDTReceived: by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu
id aa23025; 17 Nov 89 18:18 ESTReceived: from
WSMR-SIMTEL20.ARMY.MIL by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa14781;
  17 Nov 89 18:00 ESTDate: Fri, 17 Nov 89 14:15:19 MSTFrom:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: PACKET-RADIO Digest
V89 #233To: [e-mail]-ID:
<[e-mail]>PACKET-RADIO Digest
   Fri, 17 Nov 89       Volume 89 : Issue 233Today's Topics:
                Returned mail: User
unknown----------------------------------------------------------
------------Date: Fri, 17 Nov 89 12:38:13 -0800From:
[e-mail] (Mail Delivery Subsystem)Subject:
Returned mail: User unknown   ----- Transcript of session
follows -----While talking to /usr/bin/mail11v3:>>> RCPT
To:<dpdmai::hicks><<< 550-DPDMAI::HICKS; %MAIL-E-NOSUCHUSR, no
such user HICKS at node DPD04<<< 550550
<[e-mail]>... User unknown   ----- Unsent
message follows -----Received: by decwrl.dec.com; id AA22529;
Fri, 17 Nov 89 12:38:13 -0800Message-Id:
<[e-mail]>Date: 17 Nov 89 12:27:00
PDTFrom: [e-mail]:
PACKET-RADIO Digest V89 #232To: "hicks"
<[e-mail]>Return-Path:
<@consrt.rok.com,@wsmr-simtel20.army.mil:packet-radio-request@wsm
r-simtel20.army.mil>Received: from consrt.rok.com by
consrt.rok.com with SMTP ;           Fri, 17 Nov 89 11:26:25
PDTReceived: from lcs.mit.edu by consrt.rok.com with SMTP ;
     Fri, 17 Nov 89 11:26:02 PDTReceived: from
WSMR-SIMTEL20.ARMY.MIL by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21850;
  17 Nov 89 15:21 ESTDate: Fri, 17 Nov 89 12:15:34 MSTFrom:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: PACKET-RADIO Digest
V89 #232To: [e-mail]-ID:
<[e-mail]>PACKET-RADIO Digest
   Fri, 17 Nov 89       Volume 89 : Issue 232Today's Topics:
                          DIGICOM                           KA9Q
and the KAM                           NTS H&W traffic
         PK-232 prices - info request                  TAPR 9600
RAdio/Modems??? (2 msgs)                      want info on PC
attachment-------------------------------------------------------
---------------Date: Fri, 17 Nov 89 09:51:34 MEZFrom:
[e-mail]: DIGICOM>Date: 13
Nov 89 17:06:00 GMT>From:>
mailrus|jarvis.csri.toronto.edu|utgpu|utzoo|mnetor|tmsoft|masnet|
canremote|cli> [e-mail]  (CLINTON
EVANS)>Subject: Digicom>>Does anyone have experience of the
Digicom packet system for the C64?>How does it compare with a
TNC?  Are there any magazine articles,>...( No chance for a
direct reply, my mail bounced. So here  goes ... )If you compare
DIGICOM to a TNC you should take a close look to therelease
number. Some DC releases are named 4.** but these are
patchedversions, because the 'official' newest release is 3.5
and availablesince about two weeks. I met Flori, DL8MBT ( the
originator of DIGICOM)last saturday and he told me that even the
 DAMA features are includedin this current release ( see the
newest proceedings ). Plus furtherenhancements. An english
version of the new user manual is undertranslation right now and
will be available soon.Detlef ( DK4EG @ DK0MAV
).------------------------------Date: 14 Nov 89 18:58:38
GMTFrom: mitel!sce!cognos!dgbt![e-mail]  (Barry
Mclarnon DGBT/DIP)Subject: KA9Q and the KAMI've been asked by
someone for assistance in running KA9Q NET using a

KAM in KISS mode.  Unfortunately, he is not local, so I can't go
andlook at his setup; nor do I have a KAM to play with.
Apparently he canreceive on both ports, but is having trouble
with transmitting on theHF port.  I'd like to hear from anyone
who is familiar with using theKAM with NET.73, Barry VE3JF--
Barry McLarnon    Communications Research Center    Ottawa, ON
CanadaUUCP: ...utzoo!bnr-vpa!bnr-rsc!dgbt!barry   INTERNET:
[e-mail]$erve: 71470,3651     Packet radio:
VE3JF @ VE3JF------------------------------Date: 16 Nov 89
23:19:24 GMTFrom: coherent!athertn![e-mail]  (Steve
Harding)Subject: NTS H&W trafficI had planned on posting this
sooner, but y'all know how it is.How to Prepare and Send Welfare
TrafficAs recent events in the San Francisco Bay area have
shown, all hams should knowhow to handle dister traffic.  These
are simple skills to learn.  Those of youinvolved in novice
classes should take the time to pass on these tips as a partof
your class.Disaster (or Health and Welfare) traffic should
always be sent in the NTSformat.  This way your message will
have an unique ID (your call and messagenumber) in case the
delivering opeator needs to contact you with a returnmessage or
a request for further information.  Remember, during a disaster
thetracing of people and deliving of messages will be
complicated by the disasteritself.Keep the message brief.  Use
the ARL ninteen radiogram whenver possible.  Over6000 pieces of
traffic were routed into and out of the Bay area in the
weekfollowing the earthquake.If the message includes a "call
back", include the name, address, and telephonenumber, if
possible.  This information can be used to direct a message
directlyto the originator.Sending Welfare Traffic via PacketAs
our experience here in northern California has shown, packet can
handlelarge volumes of traffic easily.  Each of the BBS sysops
can tell you somewonderful stories about their own situation,
but the traffic was quicklyrouted.Use the following as a guide
to sending welfare traffic on packet:As with any NTS traffic,
use the ST command to enter your message into the BBS.Use the
ZIP @ NTSXX format whenever possible.  If you don't know the
zipcode,look it up, or call your local post office.  Using the
zipcode is moreimportant when sending welfare traffic, as some
where along the line (mostlikely in the disaster area) someone
will have to plug the zipcode into theproper field.  This will
delay your message and create extra work for abeleagured sysop
in the disaster area.An example of a correct entry is:ST 97140 @
NTSORIf it is impossible to get the zipcode, route the message
to NTSXX @ NTSXX,where XX is the 2-letter postal code.  For
example, to send a message toColorado, you would useST NTSCO @
NTSCOWhen the BBS asks for the Subject of your message, the
normal form is:QTC <city phone>.  Include enough of the phone
number so the delivering stationcan ascertain whether it is a
call that can be easily made from his or herlocation.  Often the
prefix is sufficient.Do not book welfare traffic.  Once into the
disaster area, an overworked sysopwill have to break down the
book and route the individual pieces of traffic.This will delay
your traffic.Rule of ThumbHams are extremely busy in the
disaster area.  Many of our qualified NTSoperators are also
involved in ARES and RACES programs, so welfare traffic maynot
be high on their priority list.  Unskilled operators will step
in and helpas much as they can.Make it easy on the delivering
station (and those stations handling yourtraffic along the way).
 Do your homework.  Include as much information aspossible about
the addressee and the signator.  Your chances of getting
yourwelfare message delivered (and a possible answer) will
increase dramatically.Steve - KA6ETB @ N6LDL -
[e-mail] - NTS NCN Packet
Manager------------------------------Date: 17 Nov 89 08:21:40
GMTFrom: shelby!csli![e-mail]  (Goh Kawai)Subject:
PK-232 prices - info requestI want a PK-232 tnc... Thought about
buying one from AEA, but noticed that Heath has a kit version
that sells for $289.90 including technical manual.  Is this a
good deal?  Can I buy an AEA assembled tnc for less?  if so,
where?  All info appreciated...Incidentally, if anyone in the
San Francisco bay area wants to sell his or hers PK-232, I'd be
interested.>goh<[e-mail]
(arpanet)------------------------------Date: 16 Nov 89 23:43:13
GMTFrom: [e-mail]: TAPR 9600
RAdio/Modems???Comment: Processed by UWGATEto:
[e-mail] know the status of the TAPR
9600 baud radio/modem combo they wereto be releasing??  I am
especially interested in the possibility of makingthem work full
duplex.  I have a frequency pair assigned for a 1200 baudFDuplex
440 repeater, but why bother??  I applied to be a beta tester
forthe TAPR 9600 PacketRadio but I guess I'm just not cooool
enough.Also, does anyone know if the Tapr 9600's have to be
tuned TO each other(in pairs)?? Or, can remote nodes be built up
with a scope and freq. counter?I know this is Phil bait :-)..
I'll have 1000's of memo's telling meto get 56k modems..  The
trick is to make the whole thing simple andaffordable to enough
people.  Really I just want a good backbone between3 or 4 major
cities, NO hidden terminals, and relatively few (if any) hops.No
doubt the traffic at the far ends will be 1200 baud till I'm old
enough toretire..The 440 stick, fed with 7/8" Heliax is ALREADY
up and WAITING (120' above theBaraboo, Wi.
bluffs).Well?[e-mail] 128.104.198.10
INTERNETPat, KD9UU608-255-3596
Eves.------------------------------Date: 17 Nov 89 07:53:12
GMTFrom: ka9q.bellcore.com![e-mail]  (Phil
Karn)Subject: TAPR 9600 RAdio/Modems???>Anyone know the status
of the TAPR 9600 baud radio/modem combo they were>to be
releasing??It's still being worked on, but it's taking longer
than expected to get outinto Beta test. You should be aware, by
the way, that only a 2m radio isunder development.  In my
opinion that effectively rules out full duplex,since crossband
operation is by far the easiest way to get full duplex.>I know
this is Phil bait :-).. I'll have 1000's of memo's telling me>to
get 56k modems..  The trick is to make the whole thing simple
and>affordable to enough people.Well you got me. Here's memo
1001. :-) Because I'm a Director of TAPR I havebeen previously
reluctant to comment publicly on the TAPR 9600 baud radio,but I
do have to say that I don't understand why so many people who
expressso much interest in it can't get interested in the WA4DSY
56k unit. In myopinion the latter is much more suitable for
serious high speed packetoperation, for the following reasons:1.
The design is highly modular. You can build independent transmit
andreceive sections, and they can be on any band you choose.2.
The transmitter generates MSK instead of noncoherent FSK. This
results ina very clean, efficient and stable spectrum, and the
"deviation" adjustmentis inherently exactly correct. The
adjustments that you do have to make arevery easy to do with a
scope; you don't need a calibrated deviation meter.3. Even
though the current WA4DSY demod design uses a
noncoherentdiscriminator (i.e., it treats the incoming MSK
signal as though it werenoncoherent FSK) the transmitter's use
of MSK holds open the option of laterbuilding true coherent
demodulators. These would give a 5-6 dB improvementin link
performance with NO changes required at the transmitter. This
optionis precluded by modulators like the TAPR modem that just
FM a crystalnoncoherently.4. The WA4DSY modem runs 5.8 times as
fast as the 9600 modem, but for a lotless than 5.8 times the
cost! I don't know how the 9600 modem is going toprice out, but
I would be very surprised if it ends up being less than 75%of
the cost of a complete WA4DSY modem.5. And, last but not least,
the WA4DSY modem design has been proven inactual use for several
years, and it is available NOW! It's not at alldifficult to
assemble and check out; see my review in the October issueof
73.I certainly don't oppose the TAPR 9600 baud packet radio
modem project; Godknows that even it would be a vast improvement
over 1200 baud Bell 202 toneson 2m, and it would be a waste to
slow down a perfectly good WA4DSY modem tofit it into the 2m 20
KHz bandwidth limit. But if you're going to operate onbands
above 2m (which, in my opinion, is unsuitable for serious packet
radiooperation anyway) then the WA4DSY modem is the clear
choice.Phil------------------------------Date: 17 Nov 89
01:39:29 GMTFrom:
swrinde!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!uwm.edu!ux
1.cso.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu![e-mail]: want info
on PC attachmentHas anyone collected a summary of:1.  Modem
cards, having ready connection between CPU and radio for ham
radio    uses,2.  High speed serial port cards,3.  External
modems for #2 and ham radio (not TNC's unless direct modem
capability is included),for IBM PC and clones using 8 bit or
preferabbly 16 bit bus?  Comments andsuggestions are also
welcome.  Anticipated machine will being either an Amiga2000
with IBM Bridgecard (AT bus) or a CompuAdd 316s (386SX).--Phil
Howard,
KA9WGN--<[e-mail]>------------------------------End
of PACKET-RADIO Digest V89 Issue
#232*****************************************--------------------
----------End of PACKET-RADIO Digest V89 Issue
#233*****************************************--------------------
----------End of PACKET-RADIO Digest V89 Issue
#234*****************************************--------------------
----------End of PACKET-RADIO Digest V89 Issue
#235*****************************************17-Nov-89
22:20:03-MST,21171;000000000000Return-Path:
<[e-mail]>Date: Fri, 17 Nov
89 22:15:17 MSTFrom:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: PACKET-RADIO Digest
V89 #236To: [e-mail]-RADIO
Digest         Fri, 17 Nov 89       Volume 89 : Issue 236Today's
Topics:                     Returned mail: User
unknown----------------------------------------------------------
------------Date: Fri, 17 Nov 89 20:30:21 -0800From:
[e-mail] (Mail Delivery Subsystem)Subject:
Returned mail: User unknown   ----- Transcript of session
follows -----While talking to /usr/bin/mail11v3:>>> RCPT
To:<dpdmai::hicks><<< 550-DPDMAI::HICKS; %MAIL-E-NOSUCHUSR, no
such user HICKS at node DPD05<<< 550550
<[e-mail]>... User unknown   ----- Unsent
message follows -----Received: by decwrl.dec.com; id AA03953;
Fri, 17 Nov 89 20:30:21 -0800Message-Id:
<[e-mail]>Date: 17 Nov 89 20:26:00
PDTFrom: [e-mail]:
PACKET-RADIO Digest V89 #235To: "hicks"
<[e-mail]>Return-Path:
<@consrt.rok.com,@wsmr-simtel20.army.mil:packet-radio-request@wsm
r-simtel20.army.mil>Received: from consrt.rok.com by
consrt.rok.com with SMTP ;           Fri, 17 Nov 89 19:24:38
PDTReceived: from lcs.mit.edu by consrt.rok.com with SMTP ;
     Fri, 17 Nov 89 19:23:19 PDTReceived: from
WSMR-SIMTEL20.ARMY.MIL by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa15476;
  17 Nov 89 23:22 ESTDate: Fri, 17 Nov 89 20:16:04 MSTFrom:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: PACKET-RADIO Digest
V89 #235To: [e-mail]-ID:
<[e-mail]>PACKET-RADIO Digest
   Fri, 17 Nov 89       Volume 89 : Issue 235Today's Topics:
                Returned mail: User
unknown----------------------------------------------------------
------------Date: Fri, 17 Nov 89 18:26:00 -0800From:
[e-mail] (Mail Delivery Subsystem)Subject:
Returned mail: User unknown   ----- Transcript of session
follows -----While talking to /usr/bin/mail11v3:>>> RCPT
To:<dpdmai::hicks><<< 550-DPDMAI::HICKS; %MAIL-E-NOSUCHUSR, no
such user HICKS at node DPD20<<< 550550
<[e-mail]>... User unknown   ----- Unsent
message follows -----Received: by decwrl.dec.com; id AA27309;
Fri, 17 Nov 89 18:26:00 -0800Message-Id:
<[e-mail]>Date: 17 Nov 89 18:21:00
PDTFrom: [e-mail]:
PACKET-RADIO Digest V89 #234To: "hicks"
<[e-mail]>Return-Path:
<@consrt.rok.com,@wsmr-simtel20.army.mil:packet-radio-request@wsm
r-simtel20.army.mil>Received: from consrt.rok.com by
consrt.rok.com with SMTP ;           Fri, 17 Nov 89 17:20:18
PDTReceived: from lcs.mit.edu by consrt.rok.com with SMTP ;
     Fri, 17 Nov 89 17:18:06 PDTReceived: from
WSMR-SIMTEL20.ARMY.MIL by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa13929;
  17 Nov 89 21:13 ESTDate: Fri, 17 Nov 89 17:15:27 MSTFrom:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: PACKET-RADIO Digest
V89 #234To: [e-mail]-ID:
<[e-mail]>PACKET-RADIO Digest
   Fri, 17 Nov 89       Volume 89 : Issue 234Today's Topics:
                    Atari ST BM program
 BM for Atari ST                       Radio built into PeeCee?
                   Returned mail: User
unknown----------------------------------------------------------
------------Date: 16 Nov 89 17:37:55 GMTFrom:
hpda!hpcuhb!hp-ses!hpcc01!hpccc!hpl-opus!hpnmdla![e-mail]
rkeley.EDU  (Glenn Elmore)Subject: Atari ST BM programYes, I
have a copy (October 89?) of BM.TOS which seems to work fineon
my ST and has quite a few additional features.I got it off a
diskette which came from Rob PE1CHL himself. I don'tremember if
the archived version, 8908142st.arc, had it or not.I suspect not
if that is the same version you are talking about.It should be
available by anonymous ftp fromcol.hp.com  under
ka9q/pe1chl/890814st.arcand docs under
ka9q/pe1chl/net_doc.arcGlenn Elmore -N6GN-N6GN @ K3MC
[e-mail]@nmd.hpcom
------------------------------Date: 16 Nov 89 17:40:39 GMTFrom:
hpda!hpcuhb!hp-ses!hpcc01!hpccc!hpl-opus!hpnmdla![e-mail]
rkeley.EDU  (Glenn Elmore)Subject: BM for Atari STDiana,  I
forgot to mention that I will put the new working version
ofbm.tos on col.hp.com ASAP. Also I have schematics for
Rob's8530 and modem circuitry.Glenn Elmore -N6GN-N6GN @ K3MC
 [e-mail]@nmd.hpcom
------------------------------Date: 17 Nov 89 21:25:46 GMTFrom:
shlump.nac.dec.com!delni.enet.dec.com![e-mail]
ject: Radio built into PeeCee?Okay, gang, here's what I think
would be a Neat Project.Rather than have a PC emulating a
terminal talking to a TNC talking to a radio, we can of course
have the PC act as the TNC and talk straightto the radio.  HAPN
does that now, which is Good.  Now the tough part.Let's buld a
(packet) radio into the PeeCee.  Your basic Clone has apretty
good power supply (8 A at +12V, 20A at +5 V for your
AT-class200w).  Much of the logic on a synthesizer is decoding
the control,which sounds like a natural PC application.  Build
it all on one and youcan simplify the interface to the
modulator, etc. The "full sized" PC card is pretty big, and
there are drive bays if youneed more space.  The tough part, of
course, is shielding: You have toprotect the front end from all
that noise inside the FCC-compliant PCcase.  Hey, what's a
little challenge?Any ideas?    fred
k1io------------------------------Date: Fri, 17 Nov 89 15:35:06
-0800From: [e-mail] (Mail Delivery
Subsystem)Subject: Returned mail: User unknown   -----
Transcript of session follows -----While talking to
/usr/bin/mail11v3:>>> RCPT To:<dpdmai::hicks><<<
550-DPDMAI::HICKS; %MAIL-E-NOSUCHUSR, no such user HICKS at node
DPD03<<< 550550 <[e-mail]>... User unknown
----- Unsent message follows -----Received: by decwrl.dec.com;
id AA11641; Fri, 17 Nov 89 15:35:06 -0800Message-Id:
<[e-mail]>Date: 17 Nov 89 15:31:00
PDTFrom: [e-mail]:
PACKET-RADIO Digest V89 #233To: "hicks"
<[e-mail]>Return-Path:
<@consrt.rok.com,@wsmr-simtel20.army.mil:packet-radio-request@wsm
r-simtel20.army.mil>Received: from consrt.rok.com by
consrt.rok.com with SMTP ;           Fri, 17 Nov 89 14:28:59
PDTReceived: from lcs.mit.edu by consrt.rok.com with SMTP ;
     Fri, 17 Nov 89 14:26:06 PDTReceived: by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu
id aa23025; 17 Nov 89 18:18 ESTReceived: from
WSMR-SIMTEL20.ARMY.MIL by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa14781;
  17 Nov 89 18:00 ESTDate: Fri, 17 Nov 89 14:15:19 MSTFrom:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: PACKET-RADIO Digest
V89 #233To: [e-mail]-ID:
<[e-mail]>PACKET-RADIO Digest
   Fri, 17 Nov 89       Volume 89 : Issue 233Today's Topics:
                Returned mail: User
unknown----------------------------------------------------------
------------Date: Fri, 17 Nov 89 12:38:13 -0800From:
[e-mail] (Mail Delivery Subsystem)Subject:
Returned mail: User unknown   ----- Transcript of session
follows -----While talking to /usr/bin/mail11v3:>>> RCPT
To:<dpdmai::hicks><<< 550-DPDMAI::HICKS; %MAIL-E-NOSUCHUSR, no
such user HICKS at node DPD04<<< 550550
<[e-mail]>... User unknown   ----- Unsent
message follows -----Received: by decwrl.dec.com; id AA22529;
Fri, 17 Nov 89 12:38:13 -0800Message-Id:
<[e-mail]>Date: 17 Nov 89 12:27:00
PDTFrom: [e-mail]:
PACKET-RADIO Digest V89 #232To: "hicks"
<[e-mail]>Return-Path:
<@consrt.rok.com,@wsmr-simtel20.army.mil:packet-radio-request@wsm
r-simtel20.army.mil>Received: from consrt.rok.com by
consrt.rok.com with SMTP ;           Fri, 17 Nov 89 11:26:25
PDTReceived: from lcs.mit.edu by consrt.rok.com with SMTP ;
     Fri, 17 Nov 89 11:26:02 PDTReceived: from
WSMR-SIMTEL20.ARMY.MIL by mintaka.lcs.mit.edu id aa21850;
  17 Nov 89 15:21 ESTDate: Fri, 17 Nov 89 12:15:34 MSTFrom:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: PACKET-RADIO Digest
V89 #232To: [e-mail]-ID:
<[e-mail]>PACKET-RADIO Digest
   Fri, 17 Nov 89       Volume 89 : Issue 232Today's Topics:
                          DIGICOM                           KA9Q
and the KAM                           NTS H&W traffic
         PK-232 prices - info request                  TAPR 9600
RAdio/Modems??? (2 msgs)                      want info on PC
attachment-------------------------------------------------------
---------------Date: Fri, 17 Nov 89 09:51:34 MEZFrom:
[e-mail]: DIGICOM>Date: 13
Nov 89 17:06:00 GMT>From:>
mailrus|jarvis.csri.toronto.edu|utgpu|utzoo|mnetor|tmsoft|masnet|
canremote|cli> [e-mail]  (CLINTON
EVANS)>Subject: Digicom>>Does anyone have experience of the
Digicom packet system for the C64?>How does it compare with a
TNC?  Are there any magazine articles,>...( No chance for a
direct reply, my mail bounced. So here  goes ... )If you compare
DIGICOM to a TNC you should take a close look to therelease
number. Some DC releases are named 4.** but these are
patchedversions, because the 'official' newest release is 3.5
and availablesince about two weeks. I met Flori, DL8MBT ( the
originator of DIGICOM)last saturday and he told me that even the
 DAMA features are includedin this current release ( see the
newest proceedings ). Plus furtherenhancements. An english
version of the new user manual is undertranslation right now and
will be available soon.Detlef ( DK4EG @ DK0MAV
).------------------------------Date: 14 Nov 89 18:58:38
GMTFrom: mitel!sce!cognos!dgbt![e-mail]  (Barry
Mclarnon DGBT/DIP)Subject: KA9Q and the KAMI've been asked by
someone for assistance in running KA9Q NET using aKAM in KISS
mode.  Unfortunately, he is not local, so I can't go andlook at
his setup; nor do I have a KAM to play with.  Apparently he
canreceive on both ports, but is having trouble with
transmitting on theHF port.  I'd like to hear from anyone who is
familiar with using theKAM with NET.73, Barry VE3JF-- Barry
McLarnon    Communications Research Center    Ottawa, ON
CanadaUUCP: ...utzoo!bnr-vpa!bnr-rsc!dgbt!barry   INTERNET:
[e-mail]$erve: 71470,3651     Packet radio:
VE3JF @ VE3JF------------------------------Date: 16 Nov 89
23:19:24 GMTFrom: coherent!athertn![e-mail]  (Steve
Harding)Subject: NTS H&W trafficI had planned on posting this
sooner, but y'all know how it is.How to Prepare and Send Welfare
TrafficAs recent events in the San Francisco Bay area have
shown, all hams should knowhow to handle dister traffic.  These
are simple skills to learn.  Those of youinvolved in novice
classes should take the time to pass on these tips as a partof
your class.Disaster (or Health and Welfare) traffic should
always be sent in the NTSformat.  This way your message will
have an unique ID (your call and messagenumber) in case the
delivering opeator needs to contact you with a returnmessage or
a request for further information.  Remember, during a disaster
thetracing of people and deliving of messages will be
complicated by the disasteritself.Keep the message brief.  Use
the ARL ninteen radiogram whenver possible.  Over6000 pieces of
traffic were routed into and out of the Bay area in the
weekfollowing the earthquake.If the message includes a "call
back", include the name, address, and telephonenumber, if
possible.  This information can be used to direct a message
directlyto the originator.Sending Welfare Traffic via PacketAs
our experience here in northern California has shown, packet can
handlelarge volumes of traffic easily.  Each of the BBS sysops
can tell you somewonderful stories about their own situation,
but the traffic was quicklyrouted.Use the following as a guide
to sending welfare traffic on packet:As with any NTS traffic,
use the ST command to enter your message into the BBS.Use the
ZIP @ NTSXX format whenever possible.  If you don't know the
zipcode,look it up, or call your local post office.  Using the
zipcode is moreimportant when sending welfare traffic, as some
where along the line (mostlikely in the disaster area) someone
will have to plug the zipcode into theproper field.  This will
delay your message and create extra work for abeleagured sysop
in the disaster area.An example of a correct entry is:ST 97140 @
NTSORIf it is impossible to get the zipcode, route the message
to NTSXX @ NTSXX,where XX is the 2-letter postal code.  For
example, to send a message toColorado, you would useST NTSCO @
NTSCOWhen the BBS asks for the Subject of your message, the
normal form is:QTC <city phone>.  Include enough of the phone
number so the delivering stationcan ascertain whether it is a
call that can be easily made from his or herlocation.  Often the
prefix is sufficient.Do not book welfare traffic.  Once into the
disaster area, an overworked sysopwill have to break down the
book and route the individual pieces of traffic.This will delay
your traffic.Rule of ThumbHams are extremely busy in the
disaster area.  Many of our qualified NTSoperators are also
involved in ARES and RACES programs, so welfare traffic maynot
be high on their priority list.  Unskilled operators will step
in and helpas much as they can.Make it easy on the delivering
station (and those stations handling yourtraffic along the way).
 Do your homework.  Include as much information aspossible about
the addressee and the signator.  Your chances of getting
yourwelfare message delivered (and a possible answer) will
increase dramatically.Steve - KA6ETB @ N6LDL -
[e-mail] - NTS NCN Packet
Manager------------------------------Date: 17 Nov 89 08:21:40
GMTFrom: shelby!csli![e-mail]  (Goh Kawai)Subject:
PK-232 prices - info requestI want a PK-232 tnc... Thought about
buying one from AEA, but noticed that Heath has a kit version
that sells for $289.90 including technical manual.  Is this a
good deal?  Can I buy an AEA assembled tnc for less?  if so,
where?  All info appreciated...Incidentally, if anyone in the
San Francisco bay area wants to sell his or hers PK-232, I'd be
interested.>goh<[e-mail]
(arpanet)------------------------------Date: 16 Nov 89 23:43:13
GMTFrom: [e-mail]: TAPR 9600
RAdio/Modems???Comment: Processed by UWGATEto:
[e-mail] know the status of the TAPR
9600 baud radio/modem combo they wereto be releasing??  I am
especially interested in the possibility of makingthem work full
duplex.  I have a frequency pair assigned for a 1200 baudFDuplex
440 repeater, but why bother??  I applied to be a beta tester
forthe TAPR 9600 PacketRadio but I guess I'm just not cooool
enough.Also, does anyone know if the Tapr 9600's have to be
tuned TO each other(in pairs)?? Or, can remote nodes be built up
with a scope and freq. counter?I know this is Phil bait :-)..
I'll have 1000's of memo's telling meto get 56k modems..  The
trick is to make the whole thing simple andaffordable to enough
people.  Really I just want a good backbone between3 or 4 major
cities, NO hidden terminals, and relatively few (if any) hops.No
doubt the traffic at the far ends will be 1200 baud till I'm old
enough toretire..The 440 stick, fed with 7/8" Heliax is ALREADY
up and WAITING (120' above theBaraboo, Wi.
bluffs).Well?[e-mail] 128.104.198.10
INTERNETPat, KD9UU608-255-3596
Eves.------------------------------Date: 17 Nov 89 07:53:12
GMTFrom: ka9q.bellcore.com![e-mail]  (Phil
Karn)Subject: TAPR 9600 RAdio/Modems???>Anyone know the status
of the TAPR 9600 baud radio/modem combo they were>to be
releasing??It's still being worked on, but it's taking longer
than expected to get outinto Beta test. You should be aware, by
the way, that only a 2m radio isunder development.  In my
opinion that effectively rules out full duplex,since crossband
operation is by far the easiest way to get full duplex.>I know
this is Phil bait :-).. I'll have 1000's of memo's telling me>to
get 56k modems..  The trick is to make the whole thing simple
and>affordable to enough people.Well you got me. Here's memo
1001. :-) Because I'm a Director of TAPR I havebeen previously
reluctant to comment publicly on the TAPR 9600 baud radio,but I
do have to say that I don't understand why so many people who
expressso much interest in it can't get interested in the WA4DSY
56k unit. In myopinion the latter is much more suitable for
serious high speed packetoperation, for the following reasons:1.
The design is highly modular. You can build independent transmit
andreceive sections, and they can be on any band you choose.2.
The transmitter generates MSK instead of noncoherent FSK. This
results ina very clean, efficient and stable spectrum, and the
"deviation" adjustmentis inherently exactly correct. The
adjustments that you do have to make arevery easy to do with a
scope; you don't need a calibrated deviation meter.3. Even
though the current WA4DSY demod design uses a
noncoherentdiscriminator (i.e., it treats the incoming MSK
signal as though it werenoncoherent FSK) the transmitter's use
of MSK holds open the option of laterbuilding true coherent
demodulators. These would give a 5-6 dB improvementin link
performance with NO changes required at the transmitter. This
optionis precluded by modulators like the TAPR modem that just
FM a crystalnoncoherently.4. The WA4DSY modem runs 5.8 times as
fast as the 9600 modem, but for a lotless than 5.8 times the
cost! I don't know how the 9600 modem is going toprice out, but
I would be very surprised if it ends up being less than 75%of
the cost of a complete WA4DSY modem.5. And, last but not least,
the WA4DSY modem design has been proven inactual use for several
years, and it is available NOW! It's not at alldifficult to
assemble and check out; see my review in the October issueof
73.I certainly don't oppose the TAPR 9600 baud packet radio
modem project; Godknows that even it would be a vast improvement
over 1200 baud Bell 202 toneson 2m, and it would be a waste to
slow down a perfectly good WA4DSY modem tofit it into the 2m 20
KHz bandwidth limit. But if you're going to operate onbands
above 2m (which, in my opinion, is unsuitable for serious packet
radiooperation anyway) then the WA4DSY modem is the clear
choice.Phil------------------------------Date: 17 Nov 89
01:39:29 GMTFrom:
swrinde!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!uwm.edu!ux
1.cso.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu![e-mail]: want info
on PC attachmentHas anyone collected a summary of:1.  Modem
cards, having ready connection between CPU and radio for ham
radio    uses,2.  High speed serial port cards,3.  External
modems for #2 and ham radio (not TNC's unless direct modem
capability is included),for IBM PC and clones using 8 bit or
preferabbly 16 bit bus?  Comments andsuggestions are also
welcome.  Anticipated machine will being either an Amiga2000
with IBM Bridgecard (AT bus) or a CompuAdd 316s (386SX).--Phil
Howard,
KA9WGN--<[e-mail]>------------------------------End
of PACKET-RADIO Digest V89 Issue
#232*****************************************--------------------
----------End of PACKET-RADIO Digest V89 Issue
#233*****************************************--------------------
----------End of PACKET-RADIO Digest V89 Issue
#234*****************************************--------------------
----------End of PACKET-RADIO Digest V89 Issue
#235*****************************************--------------------
----------End of PACKET-RADIO Digest V89 Issue
#236*****************************************18-Nov-89
19:24:14-MST,9879;000000000000Return-Path:
<[e-mail]>Date: Sat, 18 Nov
89 19:16:20 MSTFrom:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: PACKET-RADIO Digest
V89 #237To: [e-mail]-RADIO
Digest         Sat, 18 Nov 89       Volume 89 : Issue 237Today's
Topics:                   Information about KISS-56 wanted
    Is Heath's HK-232 the same as a PK-232? (2 msgs)
          PK-232 upgrade question                      TAPR 9600
RAdio/Modems???--------------------------------------------------
--------------------Date: 18 Nov 89 11:48:34 GMTFrom:
eru!luth!sunic!tut!oulu!tolsun![e-mail]
(Ari Husa OH8NUP)Subject: Information about KISS-56 wantedHello
again!Our 56 kbps project is moving on, sloooooowly but
steadily.  We justreceived the necessary information about the
WA4DSY modems from GRAPES- after a couple months serious
waiting...We're going to order the modems pretty soon, and
undoubtedly buildingthem will take a while, too. Anyway, it is
now time to give some morethought to the PC interface.I suppose
there is really no alternative to a regular TNC-2 yet, andthe
neat thing is that you can just couple it to a serial
connectionof almost any computer. So, we are probably going to
settle with that.I wonder what kind of performance to expect of
an AT-compatiblecomputer? What is the effective speed in file
transfer or terminalusage, respectively? And what kind of
response times do you get withping, with all the delays added
(our plan is to use the MicrovaweModules transverter)?The WA4DSY
pre-documentation was talking about an EPROM called KISS-56for
the TNC-2. Please give me some information about this! I
presume,that it makes the TNC logic to be "a little bit" more
impatient aswhen to send its stuff on the air, thus effectively
shortening thepackets and the delay in interactive use. Am I
correct, and if so, howmuch does it speed things up? Anyone
tried this?Also, the ad stated a few TNC's to be fully TNC-2
compatible, and toaccept the KISS-56 firmware. The PK-88 was not
mentioned, do you knowif it is compatible? Most of people over
here in Finland have a TAPRTNC-2 clone, which unfortunately has
no connection for an externalmodem, so we are probably going to
have to get a new TNC, too. Thatwill, of course, add the total
cost, and makes the WA4DSY solutionmuch less attractive.So, to
put it short, information of the KISS-56 firmware is
needed.Thank you in advance!    73 de Luru--    ///   Ari Husa
OH8NUP         [e-mail]    o-o
--... ...--     o    Ham Radio Operators Do It In Higher
Frequency------------------------------Date: 17 Nov 89 22:36:11
GMTFrom: hp-sdd!ncr-sd!ncrlnk!ncrcce![e-mail]  (Chuck
Rissmeyer)Subject: Is Heath's HK-232 the same as a
PK-232?Heath's HK-232 TNC looks conspicuously similar to AEA's
PK-232.  Why the nameshave only one difference between them.
Are they the same?  I suspect theyare.If they are, that means I
can use Heath's PC software for the HK-232 with myPK-232.  Does
anyone know if this will work?--   Chuck Rissmeyer (KE0VG)
           | All ideas are mine alone!
[e-mail]  PACKET - KE0VG @
WB0GDB------------------------------Date: 18 Nov 89 15:02:09
GMTFrom: shelby!csli![e-mail]  (goh kawai -
n6uok)Subject: Is Heath's HK-232 the same as a PK-232?Chuck
Rissmeyer writes:>Heath's HK-232 TNC looks conspicuously similar
to AEA's PK-232.  Why the names>have only one difference between
them.  Are they the same?  I suspect they>are.Yes, they are the
same.  The Heathkit is the kit version of the AEA PK-232.It
comes with a re-written manual, allegedly written with the
newcomer in mind.  I posted a inquiry a couple of days back
asking if anybody knew of places where you can buy an AEA PK-232
as cheap or cheaper than the Heathkit.  Any info?  If I can't
find an assembled unit for the same or lower price than
Heathkit's, then I'll build one.  >goh<
([e-mail] [arpanet]) (76056,1726 [CompuServe])
(n6uok [radio])------------------------------Date: 18 Nov 89
17:17:45 GMTFrom:
gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!sdsu!ucselx!sunstroke.sdsu.edu!amagnet
@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu  (Andrew Magnet)Subject: PK-232 upgrade
questionHas anyone heard anything good/bad about the recent
firmwareupgrade and mailbox option for the PK-232 ?Andy Magnet
(N6OSR)[e-mail]------------------------------Da
te: Sat, 18 Nov 89 12:31:41 ESTFrom:
[e-mail]: TAPR 9600
RAdio/Modems???>>Anyone know the status of the TAPR 9600 baud
radio/modem combo they were>>to be
releasing??>ka9q.bellcore.com![e-mail] (Phil Karn)
replies:>It's still being worked on, but it's taking longer than
expected to get out>into Beta test. You should be aware, by the
way, that only a 2m radio is>under development.  In my opinion
that effectively rules out full duplex,>since crossband
operation is by far the easiest way to get full duplex.>>I know
this is Phil bait :-).. I'll have 1000's of memo's telling
me>>to get 56k modems..  The trick is to make the whole thing
simple and>>affordable to enough people.>Well you got me. Here's
memo 1001. :-) Because I'm a Director of TAPR I have>been
previously reluctant to comment publicly on the TAPR 9600 baud
radio,>but I do have to say that I don't understand why so many
people who express>so much interest in it can't get interested
in the WA4DSY 56k unit. In my>opinion the latter is much more
suitable for serious high speed packet>operation, for the
following reasons:[Lots of good stuff on the DSY modem
deleted]>I certainly don't oppose the TAPR 9600 baud packet
radio modem project; God>knows that even it would be a vast
improvement over 1200 baud Bell 202 tones>on 2m, and it would be
a waste to slow down a perfectly good WA4DSY modem to>fit it
into the 2m 20 KHz bandwidth limit. But if you're going to
operate on>bands above 2m (which, in my opinion, is unsuitable
for serious packet radio>operation anyway) then the WA4DSY modem
is the clear choice.Phil you are right, your opinions are highly
valued... but let me try to putwhat I consider to be some
reality into this situation.Most of packet radio in this country
is at 1200 baud and on two meters. Yes I know that there are
exceptions and very big ones at that, but I am not talking about
California or Texas or other bits and pieces of the U.S.A., Iam
talking about the whole country in general. To put any kind of
ham radio packet network together takes some specificingredients
to get off the ground.1. Knowledge 2. Money3. TimeThe knowledge
has to be diversified in content and geographically spread tothe
point that each area can individually contribute towards the
effort. The same people that have the knowledge need to have the
money or be able to raise it to do the things they want. They
need to make the time to collect the money, build the equipment,
make it work, and then install it, not to mention getting the
site, organizing every-one to pull together, etc., etc.It's hard
to judge which is more important, but it you can significantly
cutdown on either 1, 2, or 3  then you have a much better chance
of getting something in place. The reason there are so many
NET/ROM // TheNet nodes outthere is because they are EASY to
install. There is no building required, they hook to a store
bought radio, and VIOLA.... instant node. If you get an
organization together that will build the DSY modems and putthe
whole thing together in a package where someone can just BUY IT
and PLUGIT IN, then they will take off like a rocket and will
become the new standard.This is why so many people are
interested in the TAPR 9600 Baud packetRADIO. We see it as a
9600 baud unit that we will basically be able to buy off the
shelf and plug into the wall and away it will go, plus to our
minds it is relatively cheap.... but the important thing is that
it is EASY, so it promises to cut down on the TIME, and
KNOWLEDGE required. I think everyone agrees that they would like
to have 56KB up and running all over the place. I think everyone
agrees that it is proven and is achievable. If I am right, why
aren't they up and running all over the country? I think it is
because people in general consider them too HARDto go with at
this time. They perceive them to take too much KNOWLEDGE andtoo
much TIME.  I think if Kantronics sold them completely assembled
andguaranteed to work "off the shelf", packaged in a neat little
metal boxalong with plug in radio, then they would sell like
hotcakes! In this area most of the packet network is up and
running because of heroic efforts of single individuals. These
people value TIME and MONEYabove most other things. What is
THEORETICALLY best and what SHOULD bedone have to be weighed
against the TIME//MONEY//KNOWLEDGE equation ofthe people that
are actually going to be required to do it. I posted this to the
net simply because I am sincerely interested in getting feedback
from everyone as to whether I am full of beans or whetherI am
hitting the nail on the head and am speaking the true thoughts
of a lot of people in the majority of the country.  I've got the
asbestos suit on and am ready and waiting! :-)Mark
[e-mail]3JPY@WB4UOU---------------
---------------End of PACKET-RADIO Digest V89 Issue
#237*****************************************20-Nov-89
06:24:01-MST,10611;000000000000Return-Path:
<[e-mail]>Date: Mon, 20 Nov
89 06:15:26 MSTFrom:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: PACKET-RADIO Digest
V89 #238To: [e-mail]-RADIO
Digest         Mon, 20 Nov 89       Volume 89 : Issue 238Today's
Topics:                 Format of ftpusers for NOS (2 msgs)
         Is Heath's HK-232 the same as a PK-232?
      Radio built into PeeCee?                  TAPR 9600
RAdio/Modems??? (4
msgs)------------------------------------------------------------
----------Date: 19 Nov 89 21:53:04 GMTFrom:
mcsun!ukc!pyrltd!bjcong![e-mail]  (ROGER
JAMES)Subject: Format of ftpusers for NOSI am trying to get ftp
working on the november version of nos, with noluck. I can log
in but get permission denied in response to all commands.Has the
format of ftpusers changed. I am using the old format e.g.user
password root accessfred test \ 7 Help (by email) please :-)--
[e-mail]..!mcvax!ukc!pyrltd!bjcong!roger-------------------
-----------Date: 20 Nov 89 08:19:15 GMTFrom:
ka9q.bellcore.com![e-mail]  (Phil Karn)Subject: Format
of ftpusers for NOSIn article <[e-mail]>
[e-mail] (ROGER JAMES) writes:>>I am trying to get
ftp working on the november version of nos, with no>luck. I can
log in but get permission denied in response to all
commands.>Has the format of ftpusers changed. I am using the old
format e.g.>>user password root access>fred test \ 7 Ah, yes,
that's what you get for snarfing the working updates on
flashwithout reading the tcp-group mailing list. :-)  For the
benefit of otherswho may have run into this problem, the
solution is simple: replace thebackslashes (\) with forward
slashes (/).I made this change quite a few months ago in order
to standardize the formatof the ftpusers file across the various
ports of NET.Phil------------------------------Date: 19 Nov 89
01:32:42 GMTFrom: hpda!hpcupt1!hprnd![e-mail]
 (Jim L. White)Subject: Is Heath's HK-232 the same as a
PK-232?When I assembled my Heath HK-232 I noticed the PC board
had AEA'sidentification on it.  No doubt they are of same
origin.  But Heathowns the firmware, and thus Heath will
determine whether your applicationsremain compatible with AES
units.  I want to know if AES's new PBBSextension will work on a
Heath.jim - n6ugo------------------------------Date: 20 Nov 89
10:39:18 GMTFrom:
gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!uwm.edu!ux1.cso.ui
uc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu![e-mail]:
Radio built into PeeCee?> The "full sized" PC card is pretty
big, and there are drive bays if you> need more space.  The
tough part, of course, is shielding: You have to> protect the
front end from all that noise inside the FCC-compliant PC> case.
 Hey, what's a little challenge?> > Any ideas?Separately sealed
sections with optical isolation?--Phil Howard,
KA9WGN--<[e-mail]>------------------------------Date
: 20 Nov 89 00:49:35 GMTFrom: [e-mail]  (Brian
Kantor)Subject: TAPR 9600 RAdio/Modems???Someon recently
advanced the reasons why packet radio is still at the1200 baud
appliance level in the USA.  In reverse order, they and
myrebuttals are:>3. Time    Yup, lots of retired hams haven't got
the time to do anything    in between their morning and afternoon
naps.  Guess we young    folks will have to stay up until two in
the morning.>2. Money    $500 for a 56Kbit modem, transmitter,
receiver, and antenna    must be more than most can afford.>1.
Knowledge     When you've decided there's nothing more for you to
learn,    you've decided it's time to die."I tell you Wilbur, and I
tell you Orville, that thing will never fly!"Seriously, folks,
the major reason packet radio is still at 1200bps isbecause
faster stuff isn't available off-the-shelf at Ham Radio
Outletand their ilk.  But innovation doesn't require a crowd;
history is fullof lonely men and women coming up with great
things on their own.  Whynot strike out just a bit on your own
and see?Is this attitude why the USA is becoming a nation of
lawyers and clerks,instead of inventors and engineers?C'mon!  We
can do it alone, but we can do it SOONER if more than just afew
help.        - Brian------------------------------Date: 20 Nov 89
10:39:14 GMTFrom:
brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!uwm.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.e
du!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu![e-mail]: TAPR 9600
RAdio/Modems???> 2. The transmitter generates MSK instead of
noncoherent FSK. This results in> a very clean, efficient and
stable spectrum, and the "deviation" adjustment> is inherently
exactly correct. The adjustments that you do have to make are>
very easy to do with a scope; you don't need a calibrated
deviation meter.I'm interested in recommendations of sources of
information regarding theexisting technologies and practices of
digital data modulation, hopefullywith enough information to be
able to design modems like the WA4DSY one.I'm also interested in
what the bits/sec : baud ratios and bandwidths ofvarious systems
are.If the references don't exist in ham publications, then
perhaps this canalso be taken as a suggestion for someone in the
know (more Phil bait :-)to write one.The other Phil (who doesn't
know as much)
KA9WGN<[e-mail]>------------------------------Date:
20 Nov 89 07:36:33 GMTFrom: ka9q.bellcore.com![e-mail]
(Phil Karn)Subject: TAPR 9600 RAdio/Modems???>If you get an
organization together that will build the DSY modems and put>the
whole thing together in a package where someone can just BUY IT
and PLUG>IT IN, then they will take off like a rocket and will
become the new standard.Mark, I actually happen to agree with
you. Perhaps you can lend your voiceto mine (which is getting
rather hoarse) to encourage GRAPES (and WA4DSY) tolicense their
design to commercial manufacturers, on a non-exclusive basis,so
it can be produced in quantity and gain mass acceptance.
Production andmarketing is the one place where the GRAPES/WA4DSY
modem has really fallendown so far. I've been calling this modem
"packet radio's best kept secret"for some time.TAPR's experience
has shown repeatedly that a volunteer group is simply notsuited
for large-scale manufacturing. If the only way to obtain a TNC
werestill to buy a kit from TAPR (i.e., if TAPR had not widely
andnonexclusively licensed its TNC-1 and TNC-2 designs to
commercial vendors)then we'd still be back in 1983 or so in
terms of the development of thepacket network.On the other hand,
if TAPR had developed things a little further beforecasting them
to the winds, perhaps we wouldn't today be saddled withspectral
albatrosses like Bell 202 modems which were already obsolete by
thetime the original TNC came out.  I think the TAPR hardware
designers worryfar too much about cost. They are all too willing
to make substantialperformance sacrifices just in order to shave
a few dollars off the partscost.No one, least of all a ham,
wants to pay more than they have to forsomething.  But there is
also such a thing as false economy -- as when youdiscover that
all the equipment you've been building up piecemeal over thepast
few years is going to have to be tossed out and replaced because
itcan't expand or adapt to new operating requirements.And that's
why I push the WA4DSY design so hard -- technically it is
clearlysuperior to the TAPR 9600, yet with a little attention
toward massproduction details I think the cost differential
could be reduced to or nearzero. All it needs is a little
aggressive attention from some
manufacturingengineers.Phil------------------------------Date:
20 Nov 89 08:16:22 GMTFrom: ka9q.bellcore.com![e-mail]
(Phil Karn)Subject: TAPR 9600 RAdio/Modems???>Seriously, folks,
the major reason packet radio is still at 1200bps is>because
faster stuff isn't available off-the-shelf at Ham Radio
Outlet>and their ilk.  But innovation doesn't require a crowd;
history is full>of lonely men and women coming up with great
things on their own.  Why>not strike out just a bit on your own
and see?>>Is this attitude why the USA is becoming a nation of
lawyers and clerks,>instead of inventors and engineers?>>C'mon!
We can do it alone, but we can do it SOONER if more than just
a>few help.Thanks, Brian, you said it much better than I could
have.At a bull session during the recent AMSAT convention, one
of our Europeanvisitors lamented that American hams are much
more oriented towards ready-made equipment than Europeans. I
think this is true, but it's notnecessarily bad. I have a lot of
store-bought equipment at my station -- aVHF/UHF satellite
setup, an HF station, a commercial TNC, etc. Even mycomputers
were ready-made (well, at least the individual components were
--I did have to plug in the boards).I generally don't build
anything I can buy for a reasonable price. No, Idon't consider
myself a lazy appliance operator. Why spend time reinventingthe
wheel when you can be doing something new?  (Of course, if you
don'tknow how a wheel works, it doesn't hurt to build one as a
learningexercise.) The fact is that my spare time is already
fully occupied buildingthose things I CAN'T yet buy ready-made,
like 56kb/s modems and networkingsoftware packages designed for
amateur radio. Yes, eventually all these things and more will be
available off-the-shelf.(I wouldn't mind not having to build any
more WA4DSY modems, for example.)But by then they'll just be
component building blocks for making even largersystems (like
whole networks). And there'll be a whole new set of challengesto
face at that level. The list of new things that could be built
in hamradio is endless.But I'll let you in on a secret: the real
fun is in the actual *process* ofcreating, or in learning how
somebody else's creation works.  If you're notinterested in
creating nor in learning (both terms broadly construed), thenyou
really *are* just an appliance operator. And I bet you're not
havingmuch fun, either.Phil------------------------------End of
PACKET-RADIO Digest V89 Issue
#238*****************************************20-Nov-89
12:26:59-MST,14859;000000000000Return-Path:
<[e-mail]>Date: Mon, 20 Nov
89 12:15:42 MSTFrom:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: PACKET-RADIO Digest
V89 #239To: [e-mail]-RADIO
Digest         Mon, 20 Nov 89       Volume 89 : Issue 239Today's
Topics:                  Clarkson 3C501 DRVR and Desqview??
                Format of ftpusers for NOS
    Grapes INFO????                       Radio built into
PeeCee?                   TAPR 9600 RAdio/Modem??? (Long)
                     WA4DSY
Modem------------------------------------------------------------
----------Date: Mon, 20 Nov 89 07:43:17 GMTFrom:
[e-mail]: Clarkson 3C501 DRVR and
Desqview??This is probably an OLD question.. I use the Clarkson
3C501 driver withNET (ala KA9Q).  The driver works well except
if I try to run the whole messin Desqview, my disk interrupt
gets clobbered (requests to the hard drivetime out/abort).  I
have tried loading the Clarkson driver before AND afterstarting
DV to no avail.  NET runs just fine in DV without the Clarkson
driver.I am NOT taking shots at ANY programmers, nor do I wish
to be found floatingin a river :-}..  Idea's anyone??  Would
VM-386 help/make it worse??Machine is a 386 using Quarterdeck's
Expanded Memory Manager.  I believe Itried it without QEMM too
(naked config)[e-mail]
128.104.198.10------------------------------Date: 20 Nov 89
14:40:26 GMTFrom: watmath!watserv1![e-mail]
(Bernie Roehl)Subject: Format of ftpusers for NOSIn article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Phil Karn)
writes:>>Ah, yes, that's what you get for snarfing the working
updates on flash>without reading the tcp-group mailing list.
:-)Mailing list?  I read comp.protocols.tcp-ip,
comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpcand rec.ham-radio.packet, but didn't
know there's a mailing list, too.Who do I mail to to get on
it?--     Bernie Roehl, University of Waterloo Electrical
Engineering Dept    Mail: [e-mail] OR
[e-mail]    BangPath:
{allegra,decvax,utzoo,clyde}!watmath!watdcsu!broehl    Voice:
[phone] [home]  [phone] x 2607
[work]------------------------------Date: 20 Nov 89 16:10:00
GMTFrom: [e-mail]: Grapes INFO????Comment:
Processed by UWGATEto: GATECH!MTC![e-mail],
[e-mail], What can you tell me of the
availability right now on DSY modems?Can I phone order them with
a MasterCard??  If so, how??  That ismy favorite way to get
INSTANT gratification.. Otherwise, exactly what amountmust I
send (incl shipping/hndlg)??I have an address of:    Grapes
,INC.POB 871Alpharetta, Ga30239-0871Any phone #'s down
there?..Also, in advance can you tell me about the crystalling
scheme so I canget the LONG process of ordering ROCKs out of the
way?I may do a simplex 430-440, duplex 430-440, or duplex
432/905..Sources for Xverters have all but dried up in QST!!!!
Where's the hot place to get Microwave Modules stuff?  Like
what's a phone ##?  Do Hamtronics xverterswork well??  I think
[e-mail]  hinted he had Hamtronics xverters in use.Or, was
it Brian Lloyd, RQN type?  Major concern with xverters will be
gettingthe power jacked UP to a good level.  What are the most
successful peopleusing for RF POWER amplification?  Is the text
of the DSY modem manualsavailable by FTP on the INTERNET??Please
respond CC: the rec.hamradio-packet forum so others can see
too.Tnx in advance,  [e-mail]
128.104.198.10KD9UU------------------------------Date: 20 Nov 89
18:13:00 GMTFrom:
usc!samsung!aplcen!stda.jhuapl.edu![e-mail]  (Marshall
Jose)Subject: Radio built into PeeCee?In article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:>
....>Let's buld a (packet) radio into the PeeCee.>....>The tough
part, of course, is shielding: You have to>protect the front end
from all that noise inside the FCC-compliant PC>case.  Hey,
what's a little challenge?>>Any ideas?>    fred k1ioThis is an
intriguing idea, but you're right:  it is a challenge.It would
be hard to preserve the n+1 rule of grounds (n modulescascaded
require n+1 shields), since you've got gazintas and gozoutason
both the RF and data side.  Still, it should be possible
sincethe military does it every day (mix RF & micros).One thing
comes to mind right away: NO TTL chips!  If you can pulloff this
project with MOS & CMOS only, the leisurely rise- and fall-times
should help cut down on broadband noise.Also, try beforehand to
use one master clock at a high frequencywhich only has harmonics
and subharmonics on either side of youroperating frequency
range.  This way, if you do have trash you canpull the
oscillator or even dither it.These two recommendations already
preclude the use of 100% of theexisting CPU boards.  Feh.  I
spent a recent evening trying todetermine which of the eight
crystal oscillators in my PC wasputting a harmonic on 145.025 --
yuk!With all these computers showing up at ham stations, we're
goingto see a run on 33 uH inductors, ferrite beads, and
beryllium-copperleaf springs soon!Marshall Jose
[e-mail]  ||
...mimsy!aplcen!aplvax!mjj------------------------------Date:
Mon, 20 Nov 89 13:31:15 ESTFrom:
[e-mail]: TAPR 9600 RAdio/Modem???
(Long)>[e-mail] (Brian Kantor) writes:>Someone recently
advanced the reasons why packet radio is still at the>1200 baud
appliance level in the U.S.A.  In reverse order, they and
my>rebuttals are:Brian, I was one of the ones that was pointing
out what I felt weresome of the reasons holding back the
development of "higher" speed packet development. My point in
saying what I did was not to starta fracas or lament the demise
of experimentation in ham radio perse, but to simply point out
what I felt were the facts in the situation.I do not think that
your rebuttals below are really realistic. They may all be TRUE
:-) but I don't think they really address the problem.Now my
comments in REVERSE REVERSE order.>>2. Money>    $500 for a 56Kbit
modem, transmitter, receiver, and antenna>    must be more than
most can afford.Ok, figures vary... but let me tell you what I
have to do here.Hard-line for 500 foot tower. 1/2 inch for
around $1.25 per foot or 7/8 inchfor around $4.00 per foot. If
you are going to go UHF, you better figure on7/8", so that is
$2000 plus connectors at $50 per. Antenna: You are not allowed
to put junk on a commercial tower. Figure worstcase is a DB-224
at around $650. Cost drops for 220 or 440 MHz. Two TNCS's at
$120 per plus mods. Two radios... cost.... "whatever".
Amplifiers: (long way between towers in this area) Figure around
$300-$500.Duplexer Bp/Br: ... good one costs around $1000.
Bandpass cavities to get rid of crap that duplexer did
not...around $250 per.Power Supply: Figure around 50 amps or so.
$200 for Astron RS-50Ok, so now I have all of the above (which I
do) and you are telling me to go out and build the DSY modem.
Now I need.The modem:Linear Transverter:2 TNC's (I can reuse the
old ones)IBM PC   What happens to the people that have tower
mounted their equipment?         Do you run a PC on a tower at
1200 feet that vibrates like a banshee         and has extreme
temp. variations?) If the DSY modem or support gear         has
a problem, then I have to "ride the elevator" and try to adjust
       it on the tower? I have to schedule the trip up the tower
two weeks         in advance so I need to have ready spares.
Cost? Feasibility? This          is why my stuff is on the deck
and bit the bullet on the hard-line,          but there are many
out there that put the gear on the tower. Cross band couplers
(for the new band the DSY modem is going to be on) Or new
            hard-line......New AntennaI already have THOUSANDS
invested in the node site Brian. I do not think theDSY modem can
be installed here for $500. in fact I laugh at the notion of
that thought. Maybe your figures apply somewhere is the world
but I am afraidthey are grossly unrealistic here. It raises my
hackles when you say that all we have to do is go out and spend
$500 and POOF...instant 56 KBS.  >>1. Knowledge >    When you've
decided there's nothing more for you to learn,>    you've decided
it's time to die.>"I tell you Wilbur, and I tell you Orville,
that thing will never fly!"No one says 56 KBS won't work, it
just takes some knowledge to get it upand running. What happens
when you put it together and it just sits thereand looks at you?
Now what? You have to figure out just where the problemis... is
it the "interface TNC"... the DSY modem... software in the
PC...in the EPROM that you burnt for the TNC..... is there
something weird in the RF segment? You don't figure this out
with a Simpson 260 and OHMS LAW.You need test equipment,
knowledge, time, and some more money.  It's reallyhard to pull
off all those requirements in short order for each and
everygeographic site. Am I a "slacker" for saying that I just
can't attempt thatfor more than just my area?  I.E. I can't
build and perfect 15-25 sitesthroughout the state.>>3.
Time>    Yup, lots of retired hams haven't got the time to do
anything>    in between their morning and afternoon naps.  Guess we
young>    folks will have to stay up until two in the
morning.That's a pretty hard blow Brian. I am not talking about
"the retirementfolks", (that live on a fixed income and are
trying to just get by) I amtalking about the guys that work 9 to
10 hours a day, and are fixing allthe gear for the local hams
already, AND maintaining the clubs voice repeater AND trying to
get packet going in the area. Time starts becomingcritical. The
time it takes to build and debug the DSY modem, plus learnhow to
do so in the first place becomes a significant factor.
Somethinghas to give and it would help a lot of I could just buy
the darn thingand know it was going to work perfectly and learn
how to fix it when itbreaks.  :-)>Seriously, folks, the major
reason packet radio is still at 1200bps is>because faster stuff
isn't available off-the-shelf at Ham Radio Outlet>and their ilk.
 But innovation doesn't require a crowd; history is full>of
lonely men and women coming up with great things on their own.
Why>not strike out just a bit on your own and see?Innovation
does not require a crowd, but unfortunately building a
state-wide network does. Getting a crowd of innovative people
working togetheris one of the biggest challenges of packet
radio. We don't need peoplestriking out on their own to solve
the immediate problems that we face.We need people that pull
together and invest the TIME and MONEY to pullit off. Hopefully
those same people are capable of obtaining the knowledge.>Is
this attitude why the U.S.A. is becoming a nation of lawyers and
clerks,>instead of inventors and engineers?What "attitude" are
you talking about? The fact that I feel that it is toohard to
build each node site from a kit instead of being able to just
buyand install it? I am facing reality Brian, I am working with
every personin this state to try and get moving. The problems
that I have discussed are not "theoretical" but are the real
ones that I am experiencing. Don't"shoot the messenger" just
because the news that he carries is not good. >C'mon!  We can do
it alone, but we can do it SOONER if more than just a>few
help.Agreed...totally! But we could do it a lot faster if we
could buy a unitthat is guaranteed to work out of the box, ready
to go... just plug itin and turn on the power...and if it costs
$200 more for that kind of performance....no sweat! In my
opinion the DSY modem still REQUIRESinnovative skills, talent,
knowledge, and money. These requirementsexist in the Amateur
world but not in the quantity it takes to put up a network
across the state, let alone across the country. The proof ofthat
is staring us right in the face. Phil's answer of licensing the
DSY design and trying to get it commercially produced is the
best darnthing I've heard! If there is something that we can all
do to help inthat regard, THAT'S what I am looking for! You tell
me what I and otherscan do to help there, and I for one promise
to do it.Mark
BitterlichWA3JPY@[e-mail]---------------
---------------Date: Mon, 20 Nov 89 12:16:31 ESTFrom:
[e-mail]: WA4DSY Modem Having built up a DSY
modem over a year ago I feel people need to knowthat not all
that much labour is required to get one on the air.It seems the
biggest problem is finding some one else in your area who isalso
willing to experiment.Given that you can find a local ham who is
running NET (you *have* to runkiss in your tnc-2, TAPR fimware
is too slow) and you can lay your handson a transverter to take
the DSY's 28Mhz output up to 220Mhz or 430Mhz,you are looking at
a 2 week job of a couple of hours a night to populatethe 3
circuit boards for the modem, make some well documented mods to
yourtnc-2, drill and file some holes in a box for the modem,
make up someinterconnecting cables.The modem requires a scope to
align but again the GRAPES guys have donea really good job on
the documentation and the procedure is VERY straightforward.Of
course if your into "advanced" experimenting then you might want
towait for the K3MC I/O card which DRSI is going to be selling,
in themean time a modified tnc-2 works well, I even got mine
working at 56kbpsbetween the tnc & my Mac!Please note that I do
NOT consider myself an advanced experimenter and Iam sure that
anyone who has gotten a modest sized Heath kit working andcan
follow written directions would have NO problems putting a
WA4DSYmodem on the air. In fact the Grapes guys claim that the
modem will passthe loop back test BEFORE you align it! They peak
the coils for the rfboard when they manufacture them which
leaves them within the designspec for the modem. Of course you
should still do a proper alignment.BTW, we here in Ottawa should
have our 56Kbps REPEATER on the Real
[e-mail] or VE3OCU@VE3JF Ottawa,
Canada------------------------------End of PACKET-RADIO Digest
V89 Issue #239*****************************************21-Nov-89
04:23:05-MST,8752;000000000000Return-Path:
<[e-mail]>Date: Tue, 21 Nov
89 04:15:41 MSTFrom:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: PACKET-RADIO Digest
V89 #240To: [e-mail]-RADIO
Digest         Tue, 21 Nov 89       Volume 89 : Issue 240Today's
Topics:                             BM.exe tsr?
         Grapes INFO????               Is Heath's HK-232 the
same as a PK-232?                       Multicoupling DSY modems
                 TAPR 9600 RAdio/Modems??? (2 msgs)
              TNC1 vs
Genave-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------Date: 20 Nov 89 20:13:50 GMTFrom:
jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!watmath!ria!uwovax!31002_1650@rutge
rs.eduSubject: BM.exe tsr?I have heard that their is a memory
resident version of BM.EXEIs it available somewhere for FTP or
modem access?------------------------------Date: 20 Nov 89
20:21:51 GMTFrom: [e-mail]  (Brian Kantor)Subject: Grapes
INFO????I seem to recall I sent GRAPES a check and had the kit a
week or twolater - extremely satisfactory service.  The thing
went together inabout two hours and took less than one more to
make it work - simplealignment was all it took.The crystalling
scheme is simple: you have a crystal at the transmitfrequency
and one 10.7 MHz higher for receive injection.  For 433.050MHz
(the de-facto 450 channel most people seem to be using), you
needone at 29.050 MHz and one at 39.750 MHz.I ordered my crystal

 s from International Crystal in Oklahoma Cityand had them about
two weeks later.  The catalog number for thosecrystals is
471170.  The crystals were just under $10 apiece.
ICM'stoll-free FAX number is 800-322-9426 and they take credit
card orders.I'm using Hamtronics converters; I have the XV4-2K
transmittingconverter which gives a nice 2 watts out for $79,
and the CA432-2Kreceiving converter for $49.  The receiving
converter is kinda numb;you'd want to add a GaAs preamp to that,
I'd expect.  Hamtronics hassuch a preamp for $25, but I've not
tried it.  Hamtronics is in Hilton,New York; their FAX number is
716-392-9420.Another trick is to flush the receiving converter
and the entire frontend of the modem and feed the 10.7 MHz IF of
your Icom R-7000 directlyinto the high IF of the modem.  That
way you can tune it anywhere youwant.  (Tnx to Richard Bisbey
for that idea!)After the holidays are over, I'm thinking of
ordering another DSY modemfrom GRAPES; I plan to modify it so
that it works as a full-duplexrepeater (i.e., transmitter clock
is derived from receiver clock) andput it on a hill locally with
a 433 MHz input and a 905 MHz output.The beauty of this scheme
is that no in-band duplexer is required, andpeople who are
currently using 433 MHz simplex can add a $50 converter(yeah,
Hamtronics) to convert the 905 to the 433 MHz channel
they'vebeen using all along.                -
Brian------------------------------Date: 20 Nov 89 22:01:42
GMTFrom: microsoft![e-mail]  (Clay Jackson)Subject: Is
Heath's HK-232 the same as a PK-232?Well, according to both
Heath Technical AND AEA, they are the same unit internally.  I
know that my friend's PK-232 and my HK-232 sure look likethe
same thing externally.  Heath and AEA also both agree that the
updateSHOULD work.  I'm going to find out.....When I get it,
I'll post the results, unless someone else beats me to it.Clay
Jackson------------------------------Date: 20 Nov 89 23:47:57
GMTFrom: [e-mail]: Multicoupling DSY
modemsComment: Processed by UWGATEto:
[e-mail] DSY MODEMS:I spoke with John,
WA9SOU last night.  John is a TV engineer.  He believesit would
be easy (for him anyway) to multi-couple a few xverters on the
sameantennas..  'If everthing is linear, it should work' .  I'm
no geniousbut HE feels that it's a rather simple task (money,
time asside) to balance/mix the signals onto common antennas.  I
said ' kinda like CATV directionalcouplers? '  He said 'yes,
kind of'..  He was very impressed with theflexibility inherent
in the design.   ( by common antennas, I mean sharingan antenna
with more than one rx converter or Xverter ).John also stated
that he knew (as I do) that we will need the 'headroom'soon
enough.  He already has visions of multi-coupled nodes (mostly
duplex)spanning the state.For my money, it sure beats the pants
off trying to make a VOICE radiosquirt 20Khz wide DATA out at
9600 b. (e.g., PACCOMM 9600 & Etc..)Correct me IF I'm wrong. Can
you not run a DSY modem in full duplexmode, WITHOUT a PC/TNC
some how??  I suppose you'd still need a method ofIdentification
for the FCC..  I confess, I haven't thought this all the
waythrough.------------------------------Date: 20 Nov 89
18:31:28 GMTFrom: idacrd![e-mail]  (Robert
McGwier)Subject: TAPR 9600 RAdio/Modems???From article
<[e-mail]>, by [e-mail] (Phil
Karn):> But I'll let you in on a secret: the real fun is in the
actual *process* of> creating, or in learning how somebody
else's creation works.  If you're not> interested in creating
nor in learning (both terms broadly construed), then> you really
*are* just an appliance operator. And I bet you're not having>
much fun, either.> > PhilWish I had read your first, you put it
better than I did.  But you haveit exactly right, GETTING THERE
IS ALL THE FUN.Bob N4HY--
_________________________________________________________________
___________    My opinions are my own no matter    |    Robert W.
McGwier, N4HY    who I work for! ;-)            |    CCR, AMSAT,
etc.-------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------Date: 20 Nov 89
18:29:34 GMTFrom: idacrd![e-mail]  (Robert
McGwier)Subject: TAPR 9600 RAdio/Modems???From article
<[e-mail]>, by [e-mail] (Brian Kantor):> Is this
attitude why the USA is becoming a nation of lawyers and
clerks,> instead of inventors and engineers?> > C'mon!  We can
do it alone, but we can do it SOONER if more than just a> few
help.>         - BrianBrian puts it fairly clearly but I would like to
point out the fundamentaldifference in an appliance operator and
someone who buys ready builtequipment.  When I bought my string
of Icom VHF/UHF gear for satellitework, I got each radio for
about $700 at the time.  There is no way Icould design/build
comparable gear.  I bought ready made antennas,rotors, and a
computer/rotor interface.  Am I an appliance operator?I would
say no.  At the same time I am doing this, I have developedAEA's
follow on to the PK-232, called the DSP-232 (released early
nextyear) and I had a lot to say about the Microsat that will be
launchedin January.  I wrote a satellite tracking program that
consistentlyhas been AMSAT's number one fund raiser. I'm not
tooting my horn. I'm trying to make a point and that is it is
clearI am not an appliance operator because I am not a ham radio
couch potato.IMHO, if you aren't doing SOMETHING, ANYTHING to
contribute to the hobby,you are part of the problem we are
having.  You can contribute in OTHERways than returning to the
almost impossible task of building competitiveHF/VHF/UHF all
mode transceivers ;-).  I think no one expects that ofyou!How's
about getting off your couch and go find a young girl or boy
whocan contribute to the future of the hobby and try to interest
them.  Maybeyou can contribute in $ome meaningful way to a 56
KBPS or 9600 BPS orwhatever network in your area if you don't
have the time or expertise todo it yourself.  Ok, I'm off the
soap box.  I conclude by saying either quitwhining about the
push to move on and help make it easier or you justturn the rig
off as we'll all get hardening of the
coax.Bob------------------------------Date: 21 Nov 89 10:34:33
GMTFrom:
unmvax!deimos.cis.ksu.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!uicsr
d.csrd.uiuc.edu![e-mail]: TNC1 vs GenaveI
have a TNC1 (HeathKit) and have been trying to make it work with
mybeloved Genave GTX-200. Receive is fine but there is no
transmit. I ranTX up to 16 with no result. The TNC is ok and
works into my Santec HT withno problems. Any ideas? Thanks,Steve
Look [e-mail]:
ka9szw@k9cw------------------------------End of PACKET-RADIO
Digest V89 Issue
#240*****************************************21-Nov-89
11:22:57-MST,18150;000000000000Return-Path:
<[e-mail]>Date: Tue, 21 Nov
89 11:15:09 MSTFrom:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: PACKET-RADIO Digest
V89 #241To: [e-mail]-RADIO
Digest         Tue, 21 Nov 89       Volume 89 : Issue 241Today's
Topics:       Beginner question - What do you need to get on the
air?                   TAPR 9600 RAdio/Modem??? (Long)
           TAPR 9600
RAdio/Modems???--------------------------------------------------
--------------------Date: 21 Nov 89 14:53:29 GMTFrom:
gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!sunybcs!acsu.buffalo.edu![e-mail]
o-state.eduSubject: Beginner question - What do you need to get
on the air?     All right, guys, enough of the talk about who is
the better hamfor the moment. I'm not a ham, simply because I
haven't had anyincentive that I felt was sufficient until now.
With the availabilityof 52kbits, I'm again considering. But I
want someone who knows totell me exactly what I would need to
get into this enterprise.          Right now, I have a computer
and software. I don't have alicense, modem, antenna, radio, or
anything else which might beneeded. If it's justified, I'm
willing to hit the books and get thenecessary knowledge (I have
a technical background already), but Iwant to know what I will
need in equipment before I can make theeconomic decisions that
have to precede any endeavor of this sort. Soe-mail or post,
whichever you think is reasonable, and tell me what Ineed to do
to get a 56kbits packet station on the air. This may seem
alittle arbitrary, but I've gotten into things before with a lot
oftime and money and been disappointed, and this group seems
like a goodplace to turn for this sort of info.
                    Bill.
[e-mail]------------------------------Date: 21 Nov
89 14:14:32 GMTFrom: [e-mail]  (Brian Kantor)Subject: TAPR
9600 RAdio/Modem??? (Long)I suspect we have vastly differing
goals in mind here.  I want to BUILDa high-speed digital
network, whilst I think you want to HAVE one.If the entire idea
were to only USE a high-speed ham radio network, wecould just go
out and buy one.  Point-to-point highspeed digital radiosare
easy to get; they're just sorta expensive.  Router nodes are
easyto get - there are lots of 11/23s that can run the FUZZ
software, orjust buy a C/30 from BBN - again, expensive, but an
off-the-shelfsolution.  Another question then is why to have it
a ham radionetwork?  We could commercially license it, list
every ham in creationas a member of the corporation that would
have to be formed to buy andmanage the thing, and we'd have no
restrictions on content to boot!But that's not what I want to
do.  Nor, strangely enough, I suspect, do you.In large part, the
challenge to me is in building the network:  Seeingwhat we can
do with the materials at hand.  Stretching the state of theart.
And a good part of the challenge is to see what it takes to do
itat a price where most hams can afford to participate.  That's
the reasonwhy the IBM-PC was the software development base,
although in truth it'sa slow, cranky and poorly designed piece
of last-decade's iron.  That'swhy the TNC exists.  That's why
packet got started using 202 modems overvoice radios.  But we
can move beyond those now, cheaply.Admittedly, I'm torn between
the two opposing goals of having a my cakeand eating it too: the
challenge of building the network and thechallenge of making
good use of it when we have it.Dale Heatherington came up with a
brilliant step forward when hedesigned the 56KB modem; other
people are making strides to even fasterlinks.  This is the sort
of thing that makes ham radio live for me; Isuspect I'll be
bored with the network after we've built it if we can'tkeep
making improvements in it.  A package solution just isn't for
me.    - BrianPS: Your prices are probably realistic for new stuff
bought over thecounter; I wouldn't do it that way but if you do
that's probably closeto what you'll pay.  A few points, however:
most commercial mountaintopsites nowadays use multicoupled
antennas; you don't need an antenna,hardline, or duplexer
because you'll be using the multicoupler.  Yourtransmitter will
need a cavity and a circulator to shoot into themulticoupler,
especially if it's a ham grade device, since most hamgear has a
pretty filthy spectrum compared to commercial grade gear,The
IBM-PC doesn't have to be tower mounted; you can run the
digitalstuff up the tower to the radios - that's a whole lot
safer for thetechnicians like me who have to climb the damn
thing, since you won'tbe running 115vac mains up there for me to
stick my icepick into whenI'm trying to chip my way through the
nine inches of radial ice....I wouldn't put an Astron on a
mountain; they're insufficiently cooledfor that sort of duty.
Most mountaintop sites around here have massive12-volt building
supplies anyway, typically batteries floating on a linecharger
and/or photocells, so you don't need to spend that either.
Theone we have one of our remote bases in at 9000ft has
1200amp-hours of13.5v on float and we just hook into the
busbars.  We have a DB-413antenna up about 75ft on the main
tower for transmit, and we receive offthe multicoupler, plus we
have independent antennas for the two meterand six meter remote
stations.  The controller is a wire-wrapped Z80widget and the
whole thing has been running in place for almost 10years
now.------------------------------Date: 21 Nov 89 07:16:07
GMTFrom: ogccse!emory!stiatl!rsiatl![e-mail]  (John G. De
Armond)Subject: TAPR 9600 RAdio/Modems???In article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Brian Kantor) writes:>Someon
recently advanced the reasons why packet radio is still at
the>1200 baud appliance level in the USA.  In reverse order,
they and my>rebuttals are:As a member of GRAPES, a former Board
of Directors member, and onewho has had a hand in all 3 of the
functioning 56kb switches in theNorth Georgia area (which
probably constitutes the largest 56kb LANonline in the country),
I want to offer my rebuttal to Brian's.  Iconsider these
comments not only counterproductive but also veryinaccurate.>>3.
Time>    Yup, lots of retired hams haven't got the time to do
anything>    in between their morning and afternoon naps.  Guess we
young>    folks will have to stay up until two in the morning.In
this area, the retired hams have been doing a yeoman's job of
handling the affairs of GRAPES.  Not only have they contributed
tothe extent of their technical abilities, they've completely
taken oversuch mundane tasks as responding to inquiries about
our Modem Kit, parts procurment, newsletter publication and
numerous other mundanematters of business.  Many of these things
simply were not getting donewhen the technical wizzards were
trying to multitask.  Yes, many of theseguys, young and old,
lack sophisticated technical skills but the hard core technical
aspect is about 5% of building a network.  I'd estimatethat a
good 50% is plain old fashioned politiking.  The rest is grunt
work.>>>2. Money>    $500 for a 56Kbit modem, transmitter,
receiver, and antenna>    must be more than most can afford.Why
don't we take a bit closer look at costs, particularly for a
switchsince user modems are of little use without a highsite
switch.  I'm assuminga 4 port switch (1 56kb, one LAN port, one
1200 baud 145.01 backbone link,and one dialup control port).
Some particulars:1    286 PC with 1 mb ram and a 10 mb hard
drive             1,500.002   async boards
                      60.001   modem kit
                         250.001   transverter
                             275.001   set, modem case, cables,
px, etc.                          100.003   TNCs  (optimistic
price, assumes club discount)            300.002   VHF radios
(again, optimistic used  prices)                300.001   UHF
Super Stationmaster (we only got about 3 watts        at the
antenna)                                        600.001   VHF
Super Stationmaster (for user lan)                     600.001
VHF vertical
100.001   set, hardline and connectors
    200.001   12 volt, 35 amp power supply
        150.001   UPS
            200.001   phone modem
                100.001   Phone line for a year
                    250.00Misc expenses (cabling, cabinets, etc)
                        100.00
                          ========
                              5,085.00Coincidently, we allocate
about 5 kilobucks per site for planningpurposes.  I don't know
about Brian, but that's big bucks for me.And of course, I have
not figured in the cost of a tower.  I assume oneto be available
(not true at 2 of our sites).Then we have to get back to the
time issue.  It takes a LOT of time to build a switch,
especially when you don't have the space luxury ofa 19"
equipment rack.  I'd say that it takes a good 3 man-months of
spare time to build, package, burn in and install a switch.>>1.
Knowledge >    When you've decided there's nothing more for you to
learn,>    you've decided it's time to die.>How 'bout when you get
to the stage when you no longer care to teachothers?  I'm
particularly addressing the state of NET/NOS at the moment.I've
personally long since given up on wasting my precious spare
timeRTFSC to try to figure out the latest hack in NET.  Some of
us are notyet network whizzards and need the clues contained in
the minds of thecoders.>"I tell you Wilbur, and I tell you
Orville, that thing will never fly!">>Seriously, folks, the
major reason packet radio is still at 1200bps is>because faster
stuff isn't available off-the-shelf at Ham Radio Outlet>and
their ilk.  But innovation doesn't require a crowd; history is
full>of lonely men and women coming up with great things on
their own.  Why>not strike out just a bit on your own and
see?>>Is this attitude why the USA is becoming a nation of
lawyers and clerks,>instead of inventors and engineers?Perhaps
more accurately, we're becomming a world of net.bitchers instead
ofdoers.  We don't need inventors and engineers to build
networks. We needworker-bees.  And in fact, the worker-bees
abound.  The problem is thatwith insider knowledge to direct
each step.Let's look at some REAL problems:1.    Networking
equipment is not yet off the shelf at HRO or whatever
your    favorite ham store is.  This is a REAL PROBLEM.  It was fun
building    the first modem.  It was even enjoyable building the
2nd.  But by the    time you build 5 or 6, it becomes a real pain
in the ass.  We've    almost resorted to drawing straws for GRAPES
modems.      We've done the development work, now I want to buy off
the shelf.    I'd love to see our DSY modem in a turnkey node.
Anyone that is    really interested in this problem should inquire
of ALL the     packet vendors why they keep demanding exclusive,
proprietary    rights before producing harwdare.  Guess they never
heard of standards    like, for instance, the TNC-2?2.  RF gear is
hard to come by and expensive.  The Microwave Modules
    transverters which work best with the DSY modems are expensive
and    hard to get.  I pestered the guys at Down East Microwave for
6     weeks to get mine.  Seems like the chaps at Microwave Modules
make    transverters only when the urge hits.    There are some local
efforts at transverter design but it seems    that there is a cruel
comspiracy of work demands, equipment failure,    and the small
detail of a family life that gets in the way.  You'd think    that
somewhere in this country someone could make a 10 meter to 430
    transverter on a single board that would mount with the modem
in    a compact case.  C'mone you RF gurus.  Give us some watts.
Not at     902 or above but at 430 where commercial antennas,
duplexors, and    test gear is reasonably available.3.    The digital
side of networking sucks.  The DSY modem works like    a dream.  If
the squelch opens on a signal, it will decode.      Truely amazing
if you're used to 1200 baud FSK channels. But from    the modem on
down, the situation is dismal.  The best we can do     reliably
from an unloaded PC  is 19.2kb.  Even that is not    terribly
reliable.  There are still sufficient problems in NET/NOS    that
net thruput is typically below 200 cps.  I say NET/NOS
because    we're still running pre-NOS on the switches.  Our only
attempt at    NOS resulted in a crash'n'burn.  Works fine on user
machines but    MTTC on a 4 port system is measured in seconds.    I
know that faster hardware is in the pipe but if one plants
his    feet down here and now and reviews history to this point,
the digital    side of things is a big sore thumb.4.    Documentation
for NET/NOS.  Simply put, even sophisticated users     are put off
by the current state of tcp/ip.  I've always believed    that what
separates engineering from hacking is the paperwork.      This
package, no matter  how much work phil and others have put
into    it, is a hack.  I have no other way to bring a new user up
other    than to spend hours handholding.  And usually a trip or
two to his    shack.  We simply must do better than this if we are
to be taken     seriously.  Please understand that this is a plea
based in frustration    and not anger.  I want to see IP-based
networking fly but is simply    will not now.  Please, let's take
some time out from coding and     document a bit.  Routing and name
servers and all the other neat stuff    under development is not
worth diddly if the users cannot make it work.    It was OK 4 years
ago to say that it was experimental code and not    suitable for
users.  It might even be OK now except that Brian and    others are
flaming people for not building production systems from    this
stuff.  It can't be both ways.5.    Cost.  5 Kbucks per switch and
close to 1 Kbucks for a user is     pretty rough.  I had to scheme
quite a bit in order to build my    modem.  That's the most
expensive piece of ham gear I've ever    had.  The only way GRAPES
could afford to build switches is     through the sale of modem
kits.  I really don't see how a club     without a project can do
it.6.    Critical mass.  This is most often overlooked.  By
critical mass,    I mean there being enough hams operating a new
mode to make it    worthwhile.  With TNCs, that was easy.  Most any
ham can pinch    a C-note without consulting the war department
(spousal unit :-)    A 56kb modem is a whole 'nuther matter.    I know
that critical mass is a problem even here.  When I built    my
modem, there were perhaps 3 other full time stations on
and    maybe a half dozen other part timers.  I asked a rhetorical
but    very real question to the effect that after we all download
each    others' hard drives, what more is there to do with the
modems?    Sure someone can wisecrack that we could do voice mail
or something    like that.  The problem is that this takes even
more work and     reduces the pool of critical mass candidates even
more.  When I could    not give an answer to this question and when
I saw my system idle    for days at a time, I sold the modem.  I'll
probably get something    high speed again someday when more hams
are on but it was a     waste of money at the time.7.  Time.  We've
already addressed this one but I want to mention it    again to
emphasize how the time factor drives things here.8.    Politics.
Putting a statewide network together has been and     continues to
be an ongoing political battle equivalent to any     elected
office.   The job is, of course, to convince all the
little    kinglets in the fiefdoms around the state that the GRAPES
effort is    not an attempt to horn in on local authority.  We
supply trunking    equipment and technical guidance if desired.
We've been successful    but the quest continues.9.    Lack of a
pressing impetus to change.  In other words, the
applications    our users want do not necessarily require higher
speed.  Most traffic    would fit much better into the Usenet news
model with Email tacked on    the side than in the IP 3 function
model.  User, typically not being    visionaries, don't look beyond
the present.  they depend on us techies.    And what we're pushing
right now - high speed versions of the same old    stuff - is not
exciting enough to motivate most users to change.  Sure    I can
talk about digital voice and FAX and pseudo-realtime video
and    the like but if the likelyhood of it appearing in the next
couple of    years is not real, the user listens with curiosity and
then continues    on with the old reliable stuff.  This is plain
old human nature.This has gotten quite long so I'm stopping now.
 I hope this post is takenin the spirit it is offered.  I'm not
trying to criticize anybody.  I'm trying to get things off top
dead center.  We should not criticize usersfor things beyond
their control nor for not jumping onto the first fastbandwagon
down the pike.  I guess we're learning the same lesson manyhigh
tech businesses learn the hard way - that implementing a new
technology takes many times more time and effort than anyone
could predict.73 john-- John De Armond, WD4OQC
  | Manual? ... What manual ?!? Radiation Systems, Inc.
Atlanta, GA    | This is Unix, My son, You emory!rsiatl!jgd
    **I am the NRA** | just GOTTA Know!!!
------------------------------End of PACKET-RADIO Digest V89
Issue #241*****************************************21-Nov-89
19:23:42-MST,10536;000000000000Return-Path:
<[e-mail]>Date: Tue, 21 Nov
89 19:15:15 MSTFrom:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: PACKET-RADIO Digest
V89 #242To: [e-mail]-RADIO
Digest         Tue, 21 Nov 89       Volume 89 : Issue 242Today's
Topics:                        MFJ Packet Controller
          packetradiosub (2 msgs)                       Radio
built into PeeCee?                  TAPR 9600 RAdio/Modem???
(Longer)---------------------------------------------------------
-------------Date: 21 Nov 89 02:58:32 GMTFrom:
texbell!attctc!mjbtn!raider![e-mail]  (Bob
Reineri)Subject: MFJ Packet ControllerHas anyone out there used
the MFJ-1278 Multimode Data Controller ? The ad inQST says it
has 9 modes, two more than the PK-232. What is your opionion
ofthis unit ? For the list price of 279.00, its 30 bucks cheaper
and seems tohave more features. Well, hams, what say ye ? Please
email, and I will post a summary.Bob, N4CDO-- * RaiderNet Public
Access    *Middle Tenn's Unix Gateway*   Murfreesboro, TN **
Data:[phone] 896-7905 Voice:[phone] Mail:PO Box 2371
Zip 37133 ** Domain: [e-mail] UUCP:
uunet!knuth!raider!root   HAM: N4CDO
*------------------------------Date: Tue, 21 Nov 89 16:03:00
ESTFrom: <[e-mail]>Subject:
packetradiosubcancel my sub to
packet-radio------------------------------Date: Tue, 21 Nov 89
16:01:00 ESTFrom: Richard <[e-mail]>Subject:
packetradiosubcancel my sub to
packet-radio------------------------------Date: 21 Nov 89
18:22:36 GMTFrom:
shlump.nac.dec.com!delni.enet.dec.com![e-mail]
ject: Radio built into PeeCee?In article
<[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Marshall Jose)
writes...> >One thing comes to mind right away: NO TTL chips!
If you can pull>off this project with MOS & CMOS only, the
leisurely rise- and fall->times should help cut down on
broadband noise.> >Also, try beforehand to use one master clock
at a high frequency>which only has harmonics and subharmonics on
either side of your>operating frequency range.  This way, if you
do have trash you can>pull the oscillator or even dither it.>
>These two recommendations already preclude the use of 100% of
the>existing CPU boards.  Feh.  I spent a recent evening trying
to>determine which of the eight crystal oscillators in my PC
was>putting a harmonic on 145.025 -- yuk!But that spoils the
fun, which would be to plug it into the existingPeeCees.  Inside
their noise chambers.My guess is that you'd have to install the
front end right at the BNCconnector end of the board (or drive
bay enclosure), feeding a metal shield soldered around the front
end circuitry on a 2-layer (or more!)PC board.  That would have
synthesizer inputs and IF outputs, bothat a high enough level
that the PC noise wouldn't clobber them toomuch.Or, if one used
disk drive mounting, the drive bay would house thefront end and
IF strip, all mounted inside an RF-tight enclosure withcoax
going to the modulation board on the PC bus.It reminds me of how
a mathemetician catches a lion:  Build a cage,invert it, and the
lion will be inside it (along with the rest ofthe world).  Build
an RF-tight enclosure inside the PC's RF-tightenclosure, to
shield out the noise.  Then you have the radio outsideof the box
noise, even though it's inside the box.Hamtronics boards, or
dissected HTs, might be a way to find smallenough RF strips.
fred k1io------------------------------Date: Tue, 21 Nov 89
20:28:45 ESTFrom: [e-mail]: TAPR 9600
RAdio/Modem??? (Longer)>[e-mail] (Brian Kantor) replies:>I
suspect we have vastly differing goals in mind here.  I want to
BUILD>a high-speed digital network, whilst I think you want to
HAVE one.Hmm. I really can't answer that question. I want to
build one and I also want to have one, which is why I am
building one. I am not surewhich one came first.. the chicken or
the egg! :-)  I THINK I under-stand what you are saying, but I
am really not sure. If your commentmeans that I don't want to
BUILD something... that is not correct. I don't mind and in fact
enjoy building things. However coordinatingthe politics of
building a statewide network I do not really enjoy. If the gear
could be bought off the shelf, that goal would become much
easier to implement. That was really the only reason I wrote
what I did. >If the entire idea were to only USE a high-speed
ham radio network, we>could just go out and buy one.<Details on
how to spend megabucks left out>I am looking for a happy medium
Brian and was just offering what I felt was a "reality check".
There is no need to beat me over the head with a stick! :-)
<More stuff left out>>Admittedly, I'm torn between the two
opposing goals of having a my cake>and eating it too: the
challenge of building the network and the>challenge of making
good use of it when we have it.Worry about number 2 after we
accomplish number 1. >Dale Heatherington came up with a
brilliant step forward when he>designed the 56KB modem; other
people are making strides to even faster>links.  This is the
sort of thing that makes ham radio live for me; I>suspect I'll
be bored with the network after we've built it if we can't>keep
making improvements in it.  A package solution just isn't for
me.First, I agree that Dale Heatherington is one great son of a
gun! Second,I am already bored with 1200 baud packet. I think we
will always be makingimprovements to packet radio. I doubt you
will ever get bored, especially with a mind like yours! You may
run low on cash, and you may get a littletired of the politics,
but I don't really think you will ever be bored.>PS: Your prices
are probably realistic for new stuff bought over the>counter; I
wouldn't do it that way but if you do that's probably close>to
what you'll pay.Some I bought new, some I bought used, some I
bought broke and repaired.>A few points, however: most
commercial mountaintop>sites nowadays use multicoupled antennas;
you don't need an antenna,>hard-line, or duplexer because you'll
be using the multicoupler.  ALL STOP! DROP ANCHOR! AFTERBURNER
IGNITE! Brian, this is a personal pet peeve of mine so let me
apologize in advance, no personal slight intended. BUT !!!As
soon as you ship me a mountain, I'll mount my darn equipment on
it!Are you (and other previous posters) aware that there are
places in thiscountry that are  F L A T  like in  S M O O T H
as in NO MOUNTAINS?!?! Great... I got that off my chest....
sorry.  Without a mountain it is very hard to do anything with a
radio if you take away the hard-line,duplexers and antennas. We
still use multi-couplers and combiners butusually to share a
hard-line with a commercial user or to just try and avoid having
to put ANOTHER run of it up the tower. BIG BUCKS either wayyou
go. >Your>transmitter will need a cavity and a circulator to
shoot into the>multicoupler, especially if it's a ham grade
device, since most ham>gear has a pretty filthy spectrum
compared to commercial grade gear,I am well aware on how to use
circulators, isolators, duplexers and the like. I can install,
and tune them.  Why do you need a circulator to feed into the
multi-band coupler unless you are also using a combiner? I have
never had to do this, but I sure agree with you on the bandpass
cavity!>The IBM-PC doesn't have to be tower mounted; you can run
the digital>stuff up the tower to the radios - that's a whole
lot safer for the>technicians like me who have to climb the damn
thing, since you won't>be running 115vac mains up there for me
to stick my icepick into when>I'm trying to chip my way through
the nine inches of radial ice....Do what? How do you want me to
run the "digital" stuff up a 2000 foot tower? With WIRE? With
two MEGAWATT TV stations running on the tower?  No, that won't
work Brian, you must tower mount it, unless I am
missingsomething here. There is already 220 VAC run up the tower
in conduit, along with the elevator cables, etc., etc.  When was
the last time youclimbed down a 2000 foot tower when the
elevator broke? Just curious.Also... if our towers get that kind
of ice on them, forget about the equipment boxes, the antennas
or being anywhere near-by unless you wantto die. When the ice
starts to melt, it "flakes" off the tower in nice big chunks and
literally DESTROYS anything in its path on the way down. This
includes antennas, dishes, tower cabinets, and bodies if there
happento be any around. It goes right through the roofs of
buildings and whenit hits the ground it leaves DENTS! (No joke!)
>I wouldn't put an Astron on a mountain; they're insufficiently
cooled>for that sort of duty.  Most mountaintop sites around
here have massive>12-volt building supplies anyway, typically
batteries floating on a line>charger and/or photocells, so you
don't need to spend that either.  The>one we have one of our
remote bases in at 9000ft has 1200amp-hours of>13.5v on float
and we just hook into the busbars.  We have a DB-413>antenna up
about 75ft on the main tower for transmit, and we receive
off>the multicoupler, plus we have independent antennas for the
two meter>and six meter remote stations.  The controller is a
wire-wrapped Z80>widget and the whole thing has been running in
place for almost 10>years now.I don't have a mountain, we have
generators on the ground, and Astrons workfine if not pushed too
hard. My synopsis on equipment needed was built aroundthe
requirements in this area (I mentioned that). I am very
impressed with what you have available. I and a lot of others
arenot so lucky but we are trying to make do with what we have.
Of course we have to work at it and it takes a lot more time but
we are slowly getting there. Anything that could make our job
easier would go a long way towards getting the job done. This
was the one and only reason that I wrote my feelings on the
matter! :-) ------------------------------End of PACKET-RADIO
Digest V89 Issue
#242*****************************************22-Nov-89
22:37:48-MST,17628;000000000000Mail-From: KPETERSEN created at
22-Nov-89 22:30:19Return-Path:
<[e-mail]>Date: Wed, 22 Nov
89 22:30:19 MSTFrom:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: PACKET-RADIO Digest
V89 #243To: [e-mail]-RADIO
Digest         Wed, 22 Nov 89       Volume 89 : Issue 243Today's
Topics:                   TAPR 9600 RAdio/Modem??? (Long)
          TAPR 9600 RAdio/Modems??? (6
msgs)------------------------------------------------------------
----------Date: 22 Nov 89 07:57:02 GMTFrom:
ka9q.bellcore.com![e-mail]  (Phil Karn)Subject: TAPR
9600 RAdio/Modem??? (Long)In article
<[e-mail]>
[e-mail] writes:>Ok, figures vary... but let
me tell you what I have to do here.[details of installation
expenses deleted.]Okay, then an extra $500 for a WA4DSY modem
isn't that much of a percentageincrease in the total system
cost, is it? :-)Yeah, so this is perhaps a little flip. But I
think there's a grain of truthin what I say. Most of the things
you mentioned you'd still need for a 1200baud packet switch at a
tower site, so why handicap your investment inexpensive
hardline, antennas, power supplies, etc, just to save $100 or
soon the modem?One item of yours I will mention:>IBM PC   What
happens to the people that have tower mounted their equipment?I
happen to be from the minimalist school when it comes to
equipment atremote sites. There is no, repeat, NO fundamental
need to place full-blownPCs at switch sites to handle packet. In
my last posting I described a 56kbrepeater that puts NO digital
hardware in the signal path. Not even a WA4DSYmodem, much less a
full blown PC. (You may want some digital hardware therefor
system control and telemetry, though.) It is true that such a
repeaterdoes not yet exist, so I plan to building one. At the
moment we do have an*experimental* system at a local tower site
that uses an Ampro Little Boardcomputer to drive a WA4DSY modem.
It's very compact and reasonably reliableso far. But it will get
pulled out when the linear repeater is ready.The packet switches
and server computers belong at peoples' houses wherethey can be
easily maintained. They can route packets between simple,
dumblinear repeaters on the hilltops, towers and tall
buildings.Phil------------------------------Date: 21 Nov 89
21:35:31 GMTFrom:
netcom!stratus!cloud9!jjmhome!cpoint![e-mail]  (Ken
Wolff)Subject: TAPR 9600 RAdio/Modems???In article
<[e-mail]>
[e-mail] writes:>>>>Anyone know the status of
the TAPR 9600 baud radio/modem combo they were>>>to be
releasing??>(discussion of the merits of 9600 baud and 56kb
systems deleted)>>To put any kind of ham radio packet network
together takes some specific>ingredients to get off the
ground.>(discussion of knowledge, money and time deleted)>>In
this area most of the packet network is up and running because
of >heroic efforts of single individuals. These people value
TIME and MONEY>above most other things. What is THEORETICALLY
best and what SHOULD be>done have to be weighed against the
TIME//MONEY//KNOWLEDGE equation of>the people that are actually
going to be required to do it. >>I posted this to the net simply
because I am sincerely interested in >getting feedback from
everyone as to whether I am full of beans or whether>I am
hitting the nail on the head and am speaking the true thoughts
of a >lot of people in the majority of the country.  >>I've got
the asbestos suit on and am ready and waiting! :-)>>Mark
BitterlichYou hit the nail on the head. We (the YCCC) run a 10
node PacketClustersystem covering Maine to NY that normally has
100 or more users connected.We use 144.91, 144.93, 144.95,
144.97 144.99 for the nodes and 221.07for the backbone. We would
LOVE to put together a fast, reliable backbone.The current
backbone is already hitting the usual hidden transmitter
problems. By spring we expect to have a super backbone of, at
most, 4nodes running 9600 baud or more. The real question is,
what will the standardbe, and when can we buy it off the shelf?
The main couple of guysdoing the work are also very busy with
other projects and can't evenconsider doing pioneering work in
the packet field by themselves.For the record: 1200 baud Bell
202, ax25 packet only sort-of-works. Itdefinitely does not work
very well for the master-slave, server-clientPacketCluster type
application. We normally see good performance for upto 5
simultaneous users on a node. At 10-15 users we start seeing
guysretry out after DX spots. At 25 users, stations are
constantly droppingout. I would support, and be willing to
contribute to, an effort to implement a variant of ax25 for use
as a master. Slaves would run standardax25 while the masters
would expect to have no peers and be allowed todeviate from the
ax25 spec. Any takers?Ken,
K1EA------------------------------Date: 21 Nov 89 23:13:46
GMTFrom:
cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!emory!stiatl!rsiatl![e-mail]-state.
edu  (John G. De Armond)Subject: TAPR 9600 RAdio/Modems???In
article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Phil Karn) writes:>Mark, I actually happen to agree with you.
Perhaps you can lend your voice>to mine (which is getting rather
hoarse) to encourage GRAPES (and WA4DSY) to>license their design
to commercial manufacturers, on a non-exclusive basis,>so it can
be produced in quantity and gain mass acceptance.  Production
and>marketing is the one place where the GRAPES/WA4DSY modem has
really fallen>down so far. I've been calling this modem "packet
radio's best kept secret">for some time.>>TAPR's experience has
shown repeatedly that a volunteer group is simply not>suited for
large-scale manufacturing. If the only way to obtain a TNC
were>still to buy a kit from TAPR (i.e., if TAPR had not widely
and>nonexclusively licensed its TNC-1 and TNC-2 designs to
commercial vendors)>then we'd still be back in 1983 or so in
terms of the development of the>packet network.>Phil,We'd LOVE
to see the DSY modem as a commercial product.  The problem
isthat EVERY DAMN VENDOR that has approached us that I'm aware
of (and Ido spend a lot of time on the sidelines these days) had
demanded EXCLUSIVE RIGHTS to the modem.  In other words, they
want to lock therest of the world out of 56kb.  I'll lay odds
that anybody else thattries to commercialize a ham product is
running into the same thing.I've personally talked with a couple
of vendors.  I've been unable tobudge this proprietary BS at
all.  If we want high speed turnkey networking, then let's start
putting pressure on the vendors to pickup the ham-designed
hardware and go with it.  We have the modem.  Bdaleshould have
the digital hardware soon.  Any number of people reading this
group can do the RF.  All the vendors have to do is package
itand sell it, for christssake.  Next time you have occasion to
talk toa packet vendor, hit him up as to why they don't get rid
of the Not-Invented-Here syndrom and get on the ball.John-- John
De Armond, WD4OQC                     | Manual? ... What manual
?!? Radiation Systems, Inc.     Atlanta, GA    | This is Unix,
My son, You emory!rsiatl!jgd          **I am the NRA** | just
GOTTA Know!!! ------------------------------Date: 22 Nov 89
07:02:24 GMTFrom: ka9q.bellcore.com![e-mail]  (Phil
Karn)Subject: TAPR 9600 RAdio/Modems???>I'm interested in
recommendations of sources of information regarding the>existing
technologies and practices of digital data modulation,
hopefully>with enough information to be able to design modems
like the WA4DSY one.>>I'm also interested in what the bits/sec :
baud ratios and bandwidths of>various systems are.There are
quite a few college-level digital communications theory
textbooksthat can provide a good introduction to the subject.
Here's a few on mybookshelf:Lee and Messerschmitt, "Digital
Communication", KAP, ISBN 0-89838-274-2.Excellent, up-to-date
publication (copyright 1988). I learned about this onefrom N4HY,
who immediately stole his employer's copy when it showed up
inthe company library. :-)Feher, "Digital Communications -
Satellite/Earth Station Engineering",Prentice Hall, ISBN
0-13-212068-2. Copyright 1981.  As the title suggests itdeals
primary with satellite communcations, but the sections on
modulationand coding techniques are just as applicable to
terrestrial links. This onehas more of a practical bent than the
other books here; it contains somegood comparisons of the eye
patterns and spectral characteristics of varioussynchronous
modulation techniques.Bhargava et al, "Digital Communications by
Satellite", Wiley, ISBN0-471-08316-X. Copyright 1981. Another
excellent textbook that dealsprimarily with modulation and
coding techniques. More theory and lesspractice than Feher.While
I'm plugging books, I'd like to mention one that I got recently
eventhough it doesn't deal with digital modulation techniques.
It's by Sinnema,and the title is "Electronic Transmission
Technology - lines, waves andantennas".  It is published by
Prentice Hall, ISBN 0-13-252412-0, andcopyright 1988.  I
discovered this one during a plane ride in which I satnext to a
college student who was using it as a course text. This is
an*excellent* text that neatly fills the gap between the ARRL
Handbook (whichhas lots of "rip and replicate" projects but a
very skimpy theoreticalfoundation) and the E&M course textbooks
we used at Cornell (which were soobsessed with mathematics that
few could ever see how the stuff could haveany practical
application).Phil------------------------------Date: 22 Nov 89
08:25:02 GMTFrom: ka9q.bellcore.com![e-mail]  (Phil
Karn)Subject: TAPR 9600 RAdio/Modems???>3.    The digital side of
networking sucks.  The DSY modem works like>    a dream.  If the
squelch opens on a signal, it will decode.  >    Truely amazing if
you're used to 1200 baud FSK channels. But from>    the modem on
down, the situation is dismal.  The best we can do >    reliably
from an unloaded PC  is 19.2kb.  Even that is not>    terribly
reliable.  There are still sufficient problems in NET/NOS>    that
net thruput is typically below 200 cps.  I say NET/NOS
because>    we're still running pre-NOS on the switches.  Our only
attempt at>    NOS resulted in a crash'n'burn.  Works fine on user
machines but>    MTTC on a 4 port system is measured in
seconds.WB0MPQ and I have been running NOS (as it has evolved)
on 220.55 MHz withWA4DSY modems for about the last year, 24
hours/day. The digital side ofthings has been amazingly solid.
I don't think my PC/XT router (the onewith the DRSI card that
talks to the modem) has crashed once in the pastmonth. (The
standby power supply helps a lot.) The modem link is a
littleless reliable, as I live next door to a repeater on 223.74
that occasionallydesenses the front end in my transverter. We're
looking at helicalresonators that should fix this problem.Oh
yeah, we typically get a little over 3000 BYTES per second in
binary filetransfers, disk to disk. Yes, there's room for
improvement, but it's a farcry from 200 bytes/sec. I suspect
your problem is that you're still tryingto use external TNCs,
while we're using DRSI cards. The NOS code has anacknowledged
problem with talking to the asynch ports at high speed; I'vecome
up with a few promising solutions to that problem, but there's
noreason to saddle youself with TNCs when there's already a
solution at hand,and a better one (K3MC boards) on the
way.>4.    Documentation for NET/NOS.  Simply put, even
sophisticated users >    are put off by the current state of
tcp/ip.  I've always believed>    that what separates engineering
from hacking is the paperwork.  >    This package, no matter  how
much work phil and others have put into>    it, is a hack.As a sign
I once saw at Bell Labs said, "The problem with being on
theleading edge is staying ahead of the blade."  Yes, getting
TCP/IP up andrunning takes more work than regular packet
(except, perhaps, for the PK-232:-)).  But powerful systems tend
to be more complex than less powerful ones.Yes, the
documentation is sorely lacking. Yes, the package probably
doesqualify as a "hack". After all, it's free. I do it in my
spare time for fun,as a labor of love. If you want something
more polished, you're welcome togo to FTP Software and pay
upwards of $500 per copy for their PC TCP/IP code(object only -
source is plenty extra) and a very nice manual.  And eventhen I
think you'll discover that there are a lot of things my code can
dothat FTP's can't.  I believe in building solid foundations
before Iput on the window dressings.A lot of people are
productively using my code right now, even in itspresent state.
Some have offered money, even with no guarantees of supportfrom
me. Things will get better with time, but it'll happen faster if
peoplehelp.Strictly speaking, you mean "the KA9Q Internet
Package", not tcp/ip.There are lots of TCP/IP implementations;
mine is only one.Phil------------------------------Date: 22 Nov
89 17:46:44 GMTFrom: idacrd![e-mail]  (Robert
McGwier)Subject: TAPR 9600 RAdio/Modems???From article
<[e-mail]>, by [e-mail] (Phil
Karn):>>I'm interested in recommendations of sources of
information regarding the>>existing technologies and practices
of digital data modulation, hopefully>>with enough information
to be able to design modems like the WA4DSY one.>>>>I'm also
interested in what the bits/sec : baud ratios and bandwidths
of>>various systems are.> > Lee and Messerschmitt, "Digital
Communication", KAP, ISBN 0-89838-274-2.> Excellent, up-to-date
publication (copyright 1988). I learned about this one> from
N4HY, who immediately stole his employer's copy when it showed
up in> the company library. :-)>I resemble that remark!I also
recommend Theory and Practice of Modem Design by Bingham.  I
forgotabout this one in my blast a few days ago even though I
use it regularly.It talks mostly about 1200 bps 2400 bps
telephone modems but is a usefulguide.  I also recommend for
those interested in more rigor, DigitalCommunications by John
Proakis.  I will try and think of others and makea good list and
post it in some reasonable fashion rather than thishodge podge
manner.Bob(P.S.  The librarian came and brought me the book.
She had forgotten toput company marks on it, enter it into the
library records, and thus Iassumed that I had a long term
borrowing allowance on this one ;-)  I useLee and Messerschmidt
everyday  for at least a reference if not for anactual
discussion.  It has its faults but to my mind is the best
bookcurrently available on these topics.  If someone knows of or
thinks oneis better, please let me know!!) --
_________________________________________________________________
___________    My opinions are my own no matter    |    Robert W.
McGwier, N4HY    who I work for! ;-)            |    CCR, AMSAT,
etc.-------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------Date: 22 Nov 89
09:26:23 GMTFrom: ka9q.bellcore.com![e-mail]  (Phil
Karn)Subject: TAPR 9600 RAdio/Modems???WD4OQC:>We'd LOVE to see
the DSY modem as a commercial product.  The problem is>that
EVERY DAMN VENDOR that has approached us that I'm aware of (and
I>do spend a lot of time on the sidelines these days) had
demanded >EXCLUSIVE RIGHTS to the modem.  In other words, they
want to lock the>rest of the world out of 56kb.  I'll lay odds
that anybody else that>tries to commercialize a ham product is
running into the same thing.Thanks, John, I wasn't aware of that
little tidbit. I agree, it is muchbetter to wait for someone who
is willing to accept nonexclusive rights.This has been TAPR's
policy for its projects since the beginning, and Isupport it
100%.As an example of what can happen when a group grants
exclusive rights totheir design, consider Sandpac's PS-186. Mike
Lamb of AEA has been cryingpoverty and crusading for exclusivity
for some time, but except for that onecase he's not being very
persuasive.I wish the vendors understood just how valuable the
engineering time is thatgoes into these projects, and how the
volunteer designers are motivated bywanting to get the
technology into the hands of as many hams as possible.In general
they don't mind vendors making a profit on production (after
all,it IS a boring activity) AS LONG AS there's competition to
keep them allhonest.I could tell you about another
exclusive-technology-rights deal thatresulted in problems, but
this one hasn't played itself out yet. All I cansay is that as
long as I'm a director of amateur radio organizations likeTAPR
and AMSAT, I'll *never* approve another deal that grants
exclusiverights to volunteer-developed technology to a
commercial entity. It'll benon-exclusive or
nothing.Phil------------------------------End of PACKET-RADIO
Digest V89 Issue
#243*****************************************22-Nov-89
23:21:26-MST,11676;000000000000Return-Path:
<[e-mail]>Date: Wed, 22 Nov
89 23:15:16 MSTFrom:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: PACKET-RADIO Digest
V89 #244To: [e-mail]-RADIO
Digest         Wed, 22 Nov 89       Volume 89 : Issue 244Today's
Topics:                          9600 packet modems
        Format of ftpusers for NOS                   Information
about KISS-56 wanted                       KA9Q users mailing
list                       Multicoupling DSY modems
    TAPR 9600 RAdio/Modem??? (Longer)                      TAPR
9600
RAdio/Modems???--------------------------------------------------
--------------------Date: Wed, 22 Nov 89 16:04:13 GMTFrom:
[e-mail]: 9600 packet modemsHas anyone used
the pac-comm 9600 baud modems?I was interested in how easy it
is/isn't  to hook it up to a
radio?------------------------------Date: 22 Nov 89 07:22:11
GMTFrom: ka9q.bellcore.com![e-mail]  (Phil
Karn)Subject: Format of ftpusers for NOS>Mailing list?  I read
comp.protocols.tcp-ip, comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc>and
rec.ham-radio.packet, but didn't know there's a mailing list,
too.>Who do I mail to to get on it?[e-mail] is the
mailing list for all those interested in TCP/IPover amateur
packet radio. More specifically, it is the meeting placefor
those working with the KA9Q TCP/IP package. The list has grown
quitea bit of late, largely because the code has become quite
popular inthe "regular Internet".To get on the list, send your
request to [e-mail] Kantor is the list
maintainer.Phil------------------------------Date: 22 Nov 89
19:17:28 GMTFrom:
cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!emory!stiatl!rsiatl!kd4nc![e-mail]
o-state.edu  (Gary Coffman)Subject: Information about KISS-56
wantedKeywords: In article <[e-mail]>
[e-mail] (Ari Husa OH8NUP) writes:>Our 56 kbps
project is moving on, sloooooowly but steadily.  We
just>received the necessary information about the WA4DSY modems
from GRAPES>- after a couple months serious waiting...Sorry
about the delays...we now have some new volunteers to handlethe
mail and response time should be much better.>I suppose there is
really no alternative to a regular TNC-2 yet, and>the neat thing
is that you can just couple it to a serial connection>of almost
any computer. So, we are probably going to settle with that.The
TNC approach is the only way to go with non-PC machines,but the
DRSI card is a good alternative for PC users.>The WA4DSY
pre-documentation was talking about an EPROM called KISS-56>for
the TNC-2. Please give me some information about this! I
presume,>that it makes the TNC logic to be "a little bit" more
impatient as>when to send its stuff on the air, thus effectively
shortening the>packets and the delay in interactive use. Am I
correct, and if so, how>much does it speed things up? Anyone
tried this?Ths KISS-56 EPROM is necessary because the regular
KISS EPROM istoo slow to handle 56k data. The 56k version IS
faster in the way ithandles buffers. A disk with the code is
included in the kit.>Also, the ad stated a few TNC's to be fully
TNC-2 compatible, and to>accept the KISS-56 firmware. The PK-88
was not mentioned, do you know>if it is compatible? Most of
people over here in Finland have a TAPR>TNC-2 clone, which
unfortunately has no connection for an external>modem, so we are
probably going to have to get a new TNC, too. That>will, of
course, add the total cost, and makes the WA4DSY solution>much
less attractive.A true clone of the TNC2 (namely the MFJ1270) or
a TNC with thestandard TAPR modem disconnect header such as the
PACCOM Tiny 2 is needed if you choose the TNC option to drive
the modem. We can't guaranteethat you can make the necessary
mods to any other TNC, or that theKISS 56 code will work on a
non-TAPR clone.>73 Gary Coffman KE4ZVGRAPES
Director------------------------------Date: 23 Nov 89 00:31:17
GMTFrom: [e-mail]  (Brian Kantor)Subject: KA9Q users
mailing listIf you are a user of the KA9Q Networking package,
there is a mailinglist you may join to communicate with kindred
souls.The primary orientation of the discussions is toward use
of the packageon Amateur (ham) Radio, but some of the
discussions may apply to otheruses.To subscribe to the mailing
list, send a message to '[e-mail]'(or whatever
variation of that address is appropriate for you), with
thetext    subscribe ka9q-usersin the body of the message.  You
will receive confirmation of yoursubscription by mail, if our
admittedly-stupid parser could figure outyour message and return
address.Note that an earlier message in these groups mentioned
the 'tcp group'mailing list; that is a technical workgroup
mailing list and probablyisn't what you were looking for.    -
Brian------------------------------Date: 22 Nov 89 07:43:22
GMTFrom: ka9q.bellcore.com![e-mail]  (Phil
Karn)Subject: Multicoupling DSY modems>Correct me IF I'm wrong.
Can you not run a DSY modem in full duplex>mode, WITHOUT a
PC/TNC some how??  I suppose you'd still need a method
of>Identification for the FCC..  I confess, I haven't thought
this all the way>through.I assume that you mean you want to
build a regenerative repeater, right?  Ifso, I can see some
problems and limitations:1. It's not as easy as just plugging a
demodulator into a modulator. Boththe demod and the modulator
provide their own clocks. Either you'd have tomodify the
modulator so that its clock could be slaved to the demod
clock(e.g., with a PLL) or you'd have to insert a digital
elastic store (FIFO)between the two so that any skew between the
two clocks would be matched.The size of the FIFO would have to
take into account the maximumtransmission size and the worst
case skew between the repeater's and theusing station's transmit
crystal.2. Assuming you do interface the demod to the modulator,
you still have theproblem that the regenerative repeater will
add a significant delay to thesignal in the form of its own
carrier-detect time, followed by the timerequired to switch on
its transmitter. Although the presence of a FIFO mightavoid
requiring your users to increase their TXdelays to compensate,
theadded carrier sense delay will increase the susceptibility of
the system tocollisions.In the absence of hidden terminals, the
single most important parameter thataffects the performance of a
CSMA (Carrier Sense Multiple Access) channel is"alpha".  This is
the ratio of the combined propagation delay and carriersense
delays to the duration of the packet.  Large values of alpha
(i.e.,near 1) open up large "collision windows" that can render
CSMA useless.(This makes intuitive sense -- if the information
you get by monitoringcarrier on the channel is always out of
date, then you don't *really* knowif the channel is clear when
you begin to transmit.) Large alphas are foundmainly on packet
satellite channels, but if your carrier detect time
issignificant (and it is with the WA4DSY modem, about 15
milliseconds or 100byte times at 56kb) you can have the same
problems even on short terrestrialpaths.I think the most
promising repeater for the WA4DSY modem is a linear(analog)
crossband translator. This would be just like an AMSAT
satellitetransponder, except that it's attached to the ground.
The only signficantsource of propagation delay through such a
translator would be from the 100KHz bandpass filter, which would
be on the order of 1 / 100KHz = 10microseconds, i.e., not
significant.Nevertheless, I think it would be excellent if you
actually tried theregenerative repeater techique, if only in the
hope that my (theoretical)concerns about it prove not to be
serious in practice.Phil------------------------------Date: 23
Nov 89 00:49:02 GMTFrom: [e-mail]  (Brian Kantor)Subject:
TAPR 9600 RAdio/Modem??? (Longer)I apologize; your environment
is quite different from mine.  I spentseveral years as a two-way
radio tech, including mountaintop service(and crawling under the
seats of suck-trucks) doing commercial FMstuff.  Around here,
all we have is mountains: 6000ft to 9000ft istypical.  You stick
a 70-ft H-frame tower on a Sears outhouse and gofrom there.  The
rare UHF TV station usually has its own building andtower next
to you, and they sure as hell don't run off solar power.But then
they want $100/rack/month plus $50/antenna/month, so they'reout
of the ham price range anyway.(In fact, in Lost Angeles a few
years ago, one villain built alow-power repeater that ran
entirely off the rectified TV signal; hestuck it in a small box
and bolted it up on the tower where it sat fornearly two months
before anyone noticed it.  Always had a bit of syncbuzz in the
audio though....)But really, I'm advocating that people should
try some 56kb ground-basedstuff before they start building big
networks.  And that's what's cheap.Until the PS-186 (or the
totally awesome pc i/o card) are available, wedon't have good
56kb routers - and even then, we don't have protocolsand
software to do good routing, so there's a bit of work to be
done.I don't want to hold back anyone from building anything -
quite thecontrary.  I do want to encourage people to EXPERIMENT.
 We don't haveto have a statewide network in place for people to
buy or build advancedstuff than will make good use of the
network when it IS in place!(Admittedly, you won't get Joe
Average Ham as interested until he canuse the network, but I
just can't see working my butt off to hand aglorious digital
network on a silver platter to people who weren'tinterested
before it was perfected.)And that's sorta where I'm coming
from.    - Brian------------------------------Date: 23 Nov 89
01:58:02 GMTFrom:
gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!lavaca.uh.edu!uhnix1!sugar!splut!jay@tut.c
is.ohio-state.edu  (Jay "you ignorant splut!" Maynard)Subject:
TAPR 9600 RAdio/Modems???It's a good thing that there's an
ambulance parked in my drivewaytonight. As soon as I finish
writing this, I'm going to go outside andhook myself up to the
cardioscope: my heart is doing strange things...I agree 100%
with John De Armond.The techies have done great things with
TCP/IP. It's so great andwonderful that the rest of us who
aren't TCP/IP gurus, able to decodeI-frames from memory, are
lost. The techies want to do it right, whilethe rest of us want
to do something with it now.The techies are leaving the rest of
us behind.I don't mean to deride Phil's herculean efforts: far
from it. The KA9Qpackage is a monumental effort, and one that I
couldn't duplicate inyears. Despite all that, it's not a
production program: it's a hack. Aneat hack, to be sure, but a
hack.We don't need hacks. We need production systems.-- Jay
Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL   | Never ascribe to malice that
which [e-mail]       (eieio)| adequately be
explained by stupidity.{attctc,bellcore}!texbell!splut!jay
+---------------------------------------- "...when hasn't
gibberish been legal C?" -- Tom Horsley,
[e-mail]------------------------------End of
PACKET-RADIO Digest V89 Issue
#244*****************************************23-Nov-89
13:17:23-MST,9823;000000000000Return-Path:
<[e-mail]>Date: Thu, 23 Nov
89 13:15:08 MSTFrom:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: PACKET-RADIO Digest
V89 #245To: [e-mail]-RADIO
Digest         Thu, 23 Nov 89       Volume 89 : Issue 245Today's
Topics:                     HF BBSs considered obnoxious
          NOS SMTP problem with AX25 users               TAPR
9600 RAdio/Modems (longer)                          TAPR 9600
RAdio/Modems??? (2 msgs)                           test from
VE3PZR-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------Date: 23 Nov 89 18:24:19 GMTFrom: [e-mail]
(Brian Kantor)Subject: HF BBSs considered obnoxiousThe recent
proliferation of HF packet BBSs on popular kbd-to-kbdchannels
has led me to the conclusion that the operators of thesesystems
are people with little regard for their fellow packeteers.What
with overly-frequent beaconing, MAXF settings of more than 1,
andother examples of channel hogging, these BBSs have pretty
much madepacket DX a thing of the past.One presumes, of course,
that these people have gone to the trouble ofobtaining an STA
waiver from the FCC; clearly they are operatingunattended - for
which that is required.A recent example: in a marathon
forwarding session that seeminglylasted over two days between
KA3PLC and KP4GE, the MAXFrame setting onKA3PLC is clearly set
too high - i.e., it's more than 1.  This isevident in that
monitoring the transmissions of these two stations(both quite
strong here in San Diego), nearly half of the packetstransmitted
by KA3PLC consisted of RETRANSMISSIONS of blocks of frameswhere
KP4GE had rejected one of the earlier frames in the block.
Thisis incredibly obnoxious and completely avoidable by setting
MAXF to 1.I presume that KA3PLC also has set DWAIT (the delay
before transmittingif you aren't digipeating) to zero, as there
is no perceptible delaybetween the RR/RJ from KP4GE and the
beginning of his next blast ofredundant packets.I believe that
if HF packet BBS forwarding is to take place, it shouldbe done
off the normal calling and working channels.Beacons are also a
source of annoyance and jamming.  A BBS whichbeacons any more
often than perhaps once every 15 minutes is justjamming; this is
especially true if the beacons are several packets andseveral
seconds in length.  KB5BOB (which uses the AX.25 "callsign"
ofBOBBOX) and some system identifying itself as "MUSTNG" are
alwaysapparent on 28.105; they beacon quite often.  One presumes
that thesestations have also obtained STA waivers permitting
unattended HFoperation as wel

l

.It is my belief that in consideration of the very low baud
rates in useon HF packet, and the transitory propagation
conditions, it would be AGood Thing if the HF community would
agree to move BBSs off of theprimary calling and working
channels.  On 10 meters, with which I ammost familiar, I'd
suggest putting the BBSs at 28.110.  People who wantto access
them will have a known channel to use, and the other types
ofpacket operation will be unjammed by the heavy BBS traffic.
As BBStraffic expands, perhaps 28.115 and 28.120 could also be
used.    - Brian WB6CYT------------------------------Date: 23 Nov
89 03:07:38 GMTFrom:
mailrus!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!watmath!ria!uwovax!31005_16
[e-mail]  (Mark Bramwell 1-519-661-3714)Subject: NOS
SMTP problem with AX25 usersI have a problem with forwarding
SMTP mail.  I have a machine that receives mail from the
internet and trys to pass it on to a few hamsin the area.  The
list is generated by the alias file.The HAMS don't leave their
machines turn-on.  When HAMSTER(mail machine)trys to connect, it
cannot.  TCP STATUS shows  SYN SENT.  20 minutes later,SMTP
cycles again, however, the previous SYN SENT is still there.  If
a HAMturns on his machine, it may take 2-3 hours before HAMSTER
starts to transfermail.   Is there a parameter that will cause
SMTP, or everything to give upcompletely after a period of time?
 It would be nice if it would completelyretry after 20
minutes.PS:  We all love  NOS.   waiting for manual.......--
.................................................................
..........  Mark Bramwell,    VE3PZR
                 ..
                          ..  The University of Western Ontario
         Bitnet:  [e-mail]  ..  School of Business
Administration           Packet:  VE3PZR @ VE3GYQ  ..  London,
Ontario, N6A 3K7                    Phone:   (519)  661-3714
.................................................................
..........------------------------------Date: Thu, 23 Nov 89
12:55:51 ESTFrom: [e-mail]: TAPR 9600
RAdio/Modems (longer)        Subject: TAPR 9600 RAdio/Modem???
(Longer) [e-mail] (Brian Kantor) replies:>I apologize;
your environment is quite different from mine. <good stuff left
out>>But really, I'm advocating that people should try some 56kb
ground-based>stuff before they start building big networks.  And
that's what's cheap.>Until the PS-186 (or the totally awesome pc
i/o card) are available, we>don't have good 56kb routers - and
even then, we don't have protocols>and software to do good
routing, so there's a bit of work to be done.>I don't want to
hold back anyone from building anything - quite the>contrary.  I
do want to encourage people to EXPERIMENT.  We don't have>to
have a statewide network in place for people to buy or build
advanced>stuff than will make good use of the network when it IS
in place!>(Admittedly, you won't get Joe Average Ham as
interested until he can>use the network, but I just can't see
working my butt off to hand a>glorious digital network on a
silver platter to people who weren't>interested before it was
perfected.)>And that's sorta where I'm coming from.Thanks Brian.
I sincerely appreciate your understanding of what I was talking
about. I DROOL when I think of "natural" towers thousands of
feet in the air and get so frustrated when I read of people
doing whatyou have done. (Some serious envy there) I honestly
did not understand that you were talking about EXPERIMENTING
with the new technology. You are of course 100% correct.Your
comments about building a "glorious digital network" and then
handing it over on a silver platter are especially apt. Why ARE
hamsspending THOUSANDS of their own dollars to put these systems
in place? Interesting question.  My wife is continually
questioning my sanity andmaybe she is right to do so! This
brings up the question of financing (dreaded thought). I have
longconsidered attempting to duplicate the "voice world" by
trying to start packet radio "clubs" to form a financial base.
But in the areas that have done this, there seems to be an
obstacle in accomplishing anything.By this I mean they seem to
need a committee and a vote on EVERYTHINGand the result is that
very LITTLE gets done. When individuals control the sites it is
still hard to coordinate things, but it CAN be done. (This is
NOT a slam on clubs, I'm just asking how to avoid the above
syndrome!) Are there any organizational wizards out there that
have suggestions inthis area? I think it would be a productive
subject to talk about. I am pretty stupid when it comes to
raising money and I just DESPISE running around with my hand
stuck out.  Just a thought ... Mark
BitterlichWA3JPY@[e-mail].s. Brian...
again... thanks for your MANY contributions in the further-ance
of packet radio in general! ------------------------------Date:
23 Nov 89 13:24:54 GMTFrom: [e-mail]  (Brian
Kantor)Subject: TAPR 9600 RAdio/Modems???[e-mail]
(Jay "you ignorant splut!" Maynard) writes:>We don't need hacks.
We need production systems.No offense taken, but if that's what
you want, you have few choices:   1) build it yourself   2) pay
someone else to do it for you   3) dupe someone into doing it
4) steal itFar be it from ME to dissuade you from any of the
above.    - Brian------------------------------Date: 23 Nov 89
07:13:02 GMTFrom: ka9q.bellcore.com![e-mail]  (Phil
Karn)Subject: TAPR 9600 RAdio/Modems???>I don't mean to deride
Phil's herculean efforts: far from it. The KA9Q>package is a
monumental effort, and one that I couldn't duplicate in>years.
Despite all that, it's not a production program: it's a hack.
A>neat hack, to be sure, but a hack.>>We don't need hacks. We
need production systems.I would like to invite you to join the
effort to convert my code from a hackto a production system. I
have stated many times that my own personalinterest lies in
creating solid foundations on which others can build
usefulapplications and user interfaces.  This is why I make
complete source codereadily available and why I've spent the
last year rewriting the applicationprogramming
environment.However, I would like to remind you of one of
Rinaldo's Rules, the Codin'Rule: "He who codes, rules". This
rule is particularly applicable tovolunteer software
projects.Phil------------------------------Date: Thu, 23 Nov 89
14:01:17 GMTFrom:
watmath!ria.ccs.uwo.ca!uwovax.uwo.ca![e-mail]
: test from VE3PZRThis is a test
message.------------------------------End of PACKET-RADIO Digest
V89 Issue #245*****************************************24-Nov-89
22:29:57-MST,15161;000000000000Mail-From: KPETERSEN created at
24-Nov-89 22:26:19Return-Path:
<[e-mail]>Date: Fri, 24 Nov
89 22:26:18 MSTFrom:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: PACKET-RADIO Digest
V89 #246To: [e-mail]-RADIO
Digest         Fri, 24 Nov 89       Volume 89 : Issue 246Today's
Topics:                         arrl letter
11/3/89----------------------------------------------------------
------------Date: 24 Nov 89 01:08:03 GMTFrom:
n8emr![e-mail]  (Gary Sanders)Subject: arrl
letter
11/3/89==========================================================
====|         Relayed from packet radio via                || N8EMR's
Ham BBS, 614-457-4227 (1200/2400/19.2 telebit,8N1)
|==============================================================AR
RL LETTER - November 3, 1989 - Volume 8 Number 22 - Part 1 of 3
                    ARRL EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEETSThe Executive
Committee of the American Radio Relay League met on October21 in
St. Louis. Among EC actions were: - Accept the Election
Committee report on the Director and Vice Director   elections
for the 1990-1991 term as presented by its Chairman. - Review
and authorize the filing of a cleanup petition seeking those
revisions to Part 97 that had been sought by the League, but not
  incorporated by the FCC in its recent proceeding to reorganize
Part 97. - Instruction to ARRL Counsel Imlay, N3AKD, to file a
request with FCC for   a declaratory ruling preempting state
statutes and local ordinances that   restrict the possession or
operation by licensed amateurs of Amateur   Radio equipment
having the incidental capability to receive frequencies
outside the amateur bands. - Voted to amend the 902 MHz band
plan so that 906.0-909.0 MHz is   designated for repeater
outputs and 918.0-921.0 MHz is designated for   repeater inputs,
this being the reverse of what was adopted by the Board   in
July at Minute 57 but the sense of what had been agreed to at
the   Torrance, California, meeting. - Bestowed upon John
Grebenkemper, KI6WX, the 1988 Technical Excellence   Award for
his two-part QST article, "Phase Noise and its Effects on
Amateur Communications."The Executive Committee also reviewed
the status of a number of ongoingFCC, international and
organizational matters. The full text of the Minuteswill appear
in December QST.                      LAIRD CAMPBELL, W1CUT,
RETIRESNovember 1 marks the end of an era at ARRL Headquarters:
Laird Campbell,W1CUT, is retiring from the staff after more than
35 years of service toAmateur Radio.In his letter to the
Directors, ARRL Executive Vice President Dave Sumner,K1ZZ said,
"No one person has contributed to the League in more
differentways than Laird." He joined the staff in 1954 as a
contest assistant in theCommunications Department, but soon
moved to the Technical Department wherehe spent nine years as a
Technical Assistant. A move to the ProductionDepartment as
Assistant Managing Editor came in 1964, followed by apromotion
to Managing Editor a year later. In 1972, Laird
becameAdvertising Manager and served in that position until
being named AssistantGeneral Manager for Business Operations by
Dick Baldwin in 1976. For theeleven weeks of WARC-79, Laird was
Acting General Manager and kept thingsrunning on the home front
while Dick and Dave were in Geneva. Morerecently, Laird returned
to helm of his first love -- the ProductionDepartment -- while
also serving as Senior Staff Assistant for personnelmatters.Dave
concluded his statement saying, "The Museum of Amateur Radio has
beena special interest of Laird's and we owe a great deal of
what we know todayabout the artifacts located at ARRL HQ due to
his careful stewardship."I know I speak for the entire Board
family in wishing Laird well. MarkWilson, AA2Z, will be taking
over as Production Department Manager/ManagingEditor; but no one
will take Laird's place in our hearts."   LOWER-LAYER
IMPROVEMENTS DOMINATE 8TH COMPUTER NETWORKING CONFERENCEThe ARRL
Amateur Radio 8th Computer Networking Conference was held
inColorado Springs, Colorado, on Saturday, October 7, with
approximately 150attendees.  In conjunction with the conference,
the Rocky Mountain PacketRadio Association (RMPRA) held a
packetfest on Sunday.  The ARRL DigitalCommittee met that same
day. New or modified level 1 and 2 packet-radioprotocols were
discussed in several papers, as were improvements to theradio
systems in use.A proposed broadcast protocol was presented by
Gordon Beattie, N2DSY. Thisprotocol is implemented in the BBC
software package, which is part of theRadio Amateur
Telecommunications Society (RATS) ROSE system.
Improvedperformance of the AX.25 link-layer protocol was
proposed in papers by LyleJohnson, WA7GXD, Eric Gustafson, N7CL,
and Detlef Schmidt, DK4EG.On the radio front, the
fast-approaching advent of high- speed packet-radiohardware (see
related story entitled "Awesome I/O Card in Beta Test")brought
forth much discussion of the need for coordinated network
efforts,culminating in a continental high-speed network. To whet
the appetites ofthe packeteers present, Bdale Garbee, N3EUA,
displayed the 10-GHz, 1-Mbit/spacket-radio system developed with
Glenn Elmore, N6GN.     ARRL LETTER - November 3, 1989 - Volume
8 Number 22 - Part 2 of 3          PACKET OPERATIONS DURING THE
SAN FRANCISCO EARTHQUAKE:                  LESSONS LEARNED,
SUGGESTED IMPROVEMENTSLew Jenkin, N6VV, is a member of the
Northern California Packet Associationwhich is comprised of an
extensive packet network made up of hilltop nodelocations and
over 30 BBS systems spread from Redding in the far northernpart
of California to Kern County in the central part of the state.As
one of the packet bulletin board system operators (Sysop) for
thenetwork, Lew was involved in handling heavy amounts of health
and welfaretraffic generated immediately after the October
earthquake in the SanFrancisco Bay area.After the dust had
settled a bit, Lew wrote down his thoughts about theperformance
of the packet network and lessons learned from the
emergencycreated by the earthquake. Here is a summary of his
observations andrecommendations: - Have a network backup plan,
in place in anticipation of emergency   situations. - Packet is
well designed to handle high volumes of Health and Welfare
traffic during emergencies. Tactical communications, however,
are better   handled by voice. - Because of networking
possibilities, packet networks can respond better   than any
other form of amateur communications to changes in the
emergency situations.  Members of Northern California Packet
Association   were able to completely reroute traffic throughout
the entire system in   less than 3 hours. - There is a need for
an emergency bulletin designator, supported, but   used only in
extreme emergencies. - Every amateur using packet bulletin
boards should be familiar with   packet NTS procedures.
Circumstances generated by the earthquake   required as many
hams as possible with packet capability to become   involved
with handling traffic. - All NTS traffic should be ZIP code
routed. A major problem was   misaddressed or non-addressed
traffic requiring manual intervention.Lew feels that the San
Francisco earthquake was "the first great test forthis new
packet technology" and in general, passed the test with
flyingcolors under what at times seemed like an impossible
situation.As of October 21, approximately 3000 health and
welfare messages wereposted on the N6VV bulletin board. 2200 of
them had been delivered. All ofthe messages were, at one point,
carried through the network on 220.90 MHz.
W1AW TELEPRINTER TRANSMISSIONSRecently, in response to
suggestions that the AMTOR transmission be sentfirst on
teleprinter bulletin transmissions.  W1AW conducted an
informalpoll of listeners.  The results were dead even,
indicating no mandate ineither direction.  Since a large number
of those who copy AMTOR stated thatthey do so by automatic means
and that it makes no difference to them whichtransmission is
first, it seems to us that W1AW can best serve
teleprinterlisteners by retaining the Baudot-ASCII-AMTOR order
of transmission.Further inputs are welcome.
     ATTENTION CONTESTERSMany amateurs have been confused by
Part 97.119(a) of the new Part 97concerning station
identification. This rule states, in part, "...Nostation may
transmit unidentified communications or signals, or transmit
asthe station call sign, any call sign not authorized to the
station." ARRLasked FCC for a clarification of this. The
Personal Radio Branch (whichgoverns Amateur Radio) of the FCC
has stated the following:"When another Amateur comes over to
your house to operate your station,there are two possible
station identification situations:"First, you may designate him
as the control operator of your station.Accordingly, he must
identify with your station's call sign when operatingwithin the
privileges of both his license and yours. (He signs his
callfollowing your call when he operates with privileges that
exceed yours).You both share responsibility for the station
operation as outlined above."Second, you may simply "loan" your
equipment to your friend. The equipmentin your shack then
becomes his temporary station location.  He is thestation
licensee and control operator. Remember, a station location is
anyplace you can have radio equipment--a basement, car or
specific geographiclocation.  In this case, he identifies with
his own station call sign, andis solely responsible for the
operation of the station."Often, hams will travel to another,
more effective station to snag a rareDX country through a pileup
or work a contest, and want to use their owncall sign for DX or
contest credit.  This is fine under situation twodescribed
above."     ARRL LETTER - November 3, 1989 - Volume 8 Number 22
- Part 3 of 3                               UA-K GLASNOSTThe
Portland Amateur Radio Club (PARC) delegation of 7, departed
Portlandon September 20. Making the trip to Khabarovsk, USSR
were Dick Fredrickson,WA0DIM, Kevin Hunt, WA7VTD, John White,
K7RUN, Rene Berblinger, KX7Z, andDavid Wright, N7MYO.  Hosting
their stay were members of the KhabarovskAmateur Radio Club.
Amateur licenses were given to the visitors by
thegovernment.This was the first ever Radiosport competition in
which US Hams competed onSoviet soil. Another first was that the
Soviet government grantedpermission to operate portable and
mobile during the visit. Portableoperation is not normally
granted to Soviet amateurs.In another example of glasnost, two
Soviet amateurs were examined onSeptember 28 at the first
ARRL/VEC coordinated session in the USSR.  Thesession was held
in Khabarovsk in eastern USSR and sponsored by thePortland
Oregon ARC VE Team.The two amateurs were Gene G. Shulgin, UZ3AU
(who passed the 20 WPM Morsecode exam and the Element 2 written
exam--qualifying for the NoviceLicense) and, Mike A. Zavarukhin,
UA0CN who passed the 20 WPM Morse codeexam and all written
elements to qualify for the Amateur Extra classlicense. Both
Gene and Mike should be using their new licenses during avisit
to the U.S. sometime in 1990 or 1991.   FCC DENIES PETITION TO
CHANGE NAME OF AMATEUR EXTRA CLASS OF LICENSEOn October 20, the
FCC denied the petition of Keith Greiner, AK0Q, thatproposed
changing the name of the Amateur Extra Class operator license
to"Master of Radio Communications." FCC said that,
"Implementation of thepetitioner's request would..require
significant efforts not only by theCommission but also by the
volunteer examiners and volunteer examinercoordinators,"
referring to the number of licensing forms currently in usethat
would require modification.Also sited by FCC was the fact that
only 15 members of the public commentedin the proceeding out of
almost half a million licensees making theperceived advantage of
the name change minimal at best. In closing, FCCstated, "In view
of the clear cost of undertaking this rule change and
thequestionable benefits involved, we conclude that a proposal
changing thename of the Amateur Extra Class operator is not in
the public interest anddoes not warrant consideration by the
Commission at this time."                 AO-13 IHU CRASHES
AGAIN; OPERATIONS CEASEOn Saturday, October 29 at approximately
2328 UTC, AMSAT Ground CommandStation VK5AGR noted there was no
Mode B transponder operation or telemetryon OSCAR-13's general
beacon on 145.812 MHz. At this point VK5AGR sent afew commands
to OSCAR-13 and waited to see if it's IHU would switch to
ModeJL.  It didn't.AMSAT Ground Command Station G3RUH sent the
"reset" command at 1138 UTC onSunday, October 29. DB2OS was able
to upload a short routine to the IHU'smemory turning off all the
transponders and sending the telemetry in anabbreviated format.
The OSCAR-13 spacecraft is now in a condition where itis ready
to receive its flight software again.Stay tuned to AMSAT Nets
and ARRL Bulletins for further notice on theprogress of the
return of OSCAR-13 to normal operation.
1990 ARRL HANDBOOK AVAILABLENow in its 67th edition, this annual
publication has been the radioamateur's primary reference work
on the technical aspects of Amateur Radioand radio
communications technology since 1926.Over the years, the ARRL
Handbook for the Radio Amateur has evolved into apractical
resource for engineers and radio technicians the world over.
Ithas also enjoyed immense popularity as a teaching tool at
technical schoolsand universities.  Topics of general interest
include basic electronicstheory, practical circuits, and
construction projects.The new edition of the 1990 ARRL Handbook
features many new projects,including three high-performance
VHF/UHF Yagi antennas by Steve Powlishen,K1FO. The chapter on
space communications has been completely revised; nowincluded is
current information on OSCAR 13 (Orbiting Satellite
CarryingAmateur Radio), and a new 4-element helical array for
Mode L (1260-1270 MHzuplink). There is also new information on
amplitude-compandored singlesideband (ACSSB).The 67th edition of
the ARRL Handbook was edited by Kirk Kleinschmidt,NT0Z, and
contains over 1200 pages and over 2100 tables, figures
andcharts.-- Gary W. Sanders (gws@n8emr or
...!osu-cis!n8emr!gws), 72277,1325N8EMR @ W8CQK (ip addr)
44.70.0.1 [Ohio AMPR address coordinator]HAM/SWL/SCANNER BBS
(1200/2400/PEP) 614-457-4227------------------------------End of
PACKET-RADIO Digest V89 Issue
#246*****************************************24-Nov-89
22:33:03-MST,18425;000000000000Mail-From: KPETERSEN created at
24-Nov-89 22:26:54Return-Path:
<[e-mail]>Date: Fri, 24 Nov
89 22:26:53 MSTFrom:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: PACKET-RADIO Digest
V89 #247To: [e-mail]-RADIO
Digest         Fri, 24 Nov 89       Volume 89 : Issue 247Today's
Topics:                           gateway
11/3/89----------------------------------------------------------
------------Date: 23 Nov 89 16:00:48 GMTFrom:
n8emr![e-mail]  (Gary Sanders)Subject: gateway
11/3/89==========================================================
====|         Relayed from packet radio via                || N8EMR's
Ham BBS, 614-457-4227 (1200/2400/19.2 telebit,8N1)
|==============================================================
        Gateway: The ARRL Packet Radio Newsletter - Page 1 of 4
                Volume 6 - Number 4 - November 3, 1989Published
by The American Radio Relay League             225 Main Street,
Newington, CT 06111Stan Horzepa, WA1LOU, Editor
PACKET RADIO SUPPORTS BAY EARTHQUAKE RELIEF EFFORTAn earthquake
measuring 6.9 on the Richter scale and several
after-shocksduring the following days caused widespread damage
in the San Francisco Bayarea.  ARRL Pacific Division Section
Managers Bob Vallio, W6RGG, RichardWilson, K6LRN, Glenn Thomas,
WB6W, and other ARRL officials in the affectedareas reported
that local emergency nets on the 2-meter and 220-MHz bandsare in
full swing.  The nets provided on-site emergency communications
viaamateur repeaters to public officials and representatives of
The AmericanRed Cross.  The extensive packet-radio network on 2
meters and 220 MHz inthe San Francisco area was dedicated to
handling the heavy volume of healthand welfare traffic.from The
ARRL Letter        NORTHERN CALIFORNIA 433-MHZ PACKET-RADIO BAND
PLAN PROPOSEDAt the last general meeting of the Northern Amateur
Relay Council ofCalifornia (NARCC), a plan was proposed to
allocate 433.00 to 433.50 MHz topacket radio.  It was tabled
because certain questions needed to beanswered before approving
the new subband.  The proposed subband will allowNorthern
California packeteers to move much of their linking from 2
metersand 220 MHz, which is especially critical if the 220-222
MHz subband islost, and head in the direction of higher speed
links, which are prohibitedby emission and bandwidth
restrictions on the lower frequencies.  (Thosefrequencies will
be used for mail forwarding, keyboard-to-keyboardconversations,
DX-spotting network, TCP/IP, etc.) At the October meeting,NARCC
hopes to gain final membership approval of this much needed new
bandof frequencies.by Brad Watson, WA6AEO, Northern California
Packet Associationfrequency coordinator - from the NARCC
newsletter               MICROSAT TESTING CONTINUES FOR JANUARY
LAUNCHBob McGwier, N4HY, and Doug Loughmiller, KO5I, spent an
entire week performingsoftware and hardware testing of the four
AMSAT MicroSats (PACSAT, LUSAT,DOVE, and WEBERSAT), which are
now scheduled for launch in January.  ChrisWilliams, WA3PSD, of
Weber State College, assisted in the testing.  The mainthrust of
the effort was to perform extensive software testing of the
AX.25protocol and the calibration of telemetry parameters.  This
software gathersthe telemetry values and packetizes them so that
they can be transmitted.  Thespacecraft will send telemetry
either as unconnected packets or specificparameters, on request,
to a connected station.One of the most enjoyable aspects of the
week's effort was the testing of theWEBERSAT CCD camera.
WEBERSAT was set up on a table in the MicroSatlaboratory with
its camera pointed to the mountains around Boulder, Colorado.A
command to take a picture was sent to WEBERSAT from across the
room usingVHF/UHF radios.  The picture was taken, the
information was stored andprocessed, and then it was sent from
the WEBERSAT MicroSat back across theroom to a laptop computer
via a TAPR PSK demodulator, an MFJ TNC-2 clone, andICOM 275/475
transceivers.The Weber State College-developed software
reprocessed the picture data andproduced an excellent digitized
image on an EGA screen.  At this point, therewas much joy and
celebration expressed by the entire MicroSat test team.Chris
Williams said that because of the launch delay, the software to
processthe pictures will be available from AMSAT-NA shortly
before launch.At this point there will be only minimal testing
of the MicroSats until thelaunch campaign begins.  Until then,
only a skeleton crew will maintainsatellites.  from AMSAT News
Service          Gateway: The ARRL Packet Radio Newsletter -
Page 2 of 4                  Volume 6 - Number 4 - November 3,
1989                        NOVICE NOTCH: NORTHERN OHIOIn
Northern Ohio, there is quite a selection of activities for the
Novicepacketeer to choose from including several PBBSs on 223.70
MHz:     KA8Z in Canton     N8FIS is Fremont     W8HHF in Toledo
    WA8BXN in Cleveland     WB8JUI in BellevueThere are also a
number of network nodes that are accessible on 223.70 MHz.These
ports allow Novices to access over 60 nodes via the 4800-baud,
70-cmtrunk network that operates throughout Ohio.  The systems
with 223.70-MHzports include:     K8EIW-5 (CAN2) in Canton
K8EIW-9 (CLE220) in Cleveland     KA8TEF-3 (REP2) in RepublicFor
the Novice who is ready for more of a challenge, there are
severalTCP/IP systems that allow cluster routing throughout the
state via thedeveloping TCP/IP network.  TCP/IP systems that are
accessible on 223.70MHz include:     KA8Z in Canton     WA8BXN
in Cleveland     WB8JUI in Bellevue     WB8LYF-4 (#RSNIP) in
Risingsun  from Phil Frazier, KA8TEF @ N8FIS
[44.70.16.1](Gateway would like to continue publicizing Novice
packet-radio activity,so if you know of any, please let me know,
too. - WA1LOU)                    RUDAK REVIVAL PARTIALLY
SUCCESSFULLast week, Peter Guelzow, DB2OS, and others made
another attempt to reviveRUDAK (a German acronym for
"Regenerating Transponder for Digital AmateurCommunication") to
see if was possible to bring it on-line after sittingidly for
approximately six months.  RUDAK was intended to be a
packet-radiodigipeater aboard OSCAR 13, but shortly after the
launch, it was discoveredthat the RUDAK bootstrap loader would
not load the necessary software.  Theculprit appeared to be a
defective PROM chip that holds the bootstraploader
software.However, last week some success was achieved when the
bootstrap loaderstarted loading software from the ground
station.  Although it was stillnot possible to load all of the
necessary software, the mere fact that theRUDAK bootstrap loader
worked at all leaves room for hope.  The results ofthis attempt
will be analyzed by DB2OS, Hanspeter Kuhlen, DK1YQ, and
othersand future efforts will be planned.  Perhaps with a little
bit of luck,RUDAK can eventually be brought into operation.from
AMSAT News Service                           NEW SOFTWARE
RELEASESAA4RE's BB, Version 2.7, a PBBS for IBM PC and
compatible computers isavailable for downloading from
CompuServe's HamNet data library 9 (DL9),COYnet Landline BBS
(914-485-3393), Pleasant Valley Phone BBS (508-688-1348),and
WA6RDH's telephone BBS (916-678-1535), or it is available on
disk fromTAPR (PO Box 12925, Tucson, AZ 85732).G3ZCZ's LAN-LINK,
Version 1.54, a terminal program for IBM PC and
compatiblecomputers with multi-mode controllers/TNCs is
available for downloading fromCompuServe's HamNet data library 9
(DL9).G8BPQ's TheNode, Version 3.51, networking software for IBM
PC and compatiblecomputers is available for downloading from
CompuServe's HamNet data library 9(DL9), and Pleasant Valley
Phone BBS (508-688-1348).R95, Version 1.2, a binary to data text
conversion utility for IBM PC andcompatible computers is
available from Texas Packet Software (PO Box 50106,Denton, TX
76206).W0RLI Mailbox, Version 11.4, a PBBS for IBM PC and
compatible computers isavailable for downloading from
CompuServe's HamNet data library 9 (DL9),N1EDF's telephone BBS
(508-949-3590), Pleasant Valley Phone BBS (508-688-1348),
VE3GYQ's telephone BBS (519-660-1442) or it is available on disk
fromTAPR (PO Box 12925, Tucson, AZ 85732).  (File name
FS1104.EXE is the fastupgrade for those who already have Version
11.2, while file name MB1104.EXE isthe full-blown version.)
    Gateway: The ARRL Packet Radio Newsletter - Page 3 of 4
            Volume 6 - Number 4 - November 3, 1989
           MORE CONFERENCING NEWS(The previous issue of Gateway
included a number of reports from the ARRL8th Computer
Networking Conference that were written by Jon Bloom, KE3Z.Two
additional reports from the conference follow.  The first was
providedto Gateway by Greg Jones, WD5IVD.  The second report was
written by J. G.Beattie, Jr. N2DSY and was downloaded from
CompuServe's HamNet.)                         N2DSY's Conference
ReportThe Radio Amateur Telecommunications Society (RATS) was
well represented atthe conference by J. Gordon Beattie, Jr,
N2DSY and Tom Moulton, W2VY.  Manycopies of the ROSE X.25 packet
switch software were distributed (for free)along with manuals.
A network of ROSE X.25 Switches and a bulletin boardwas
established without prior notice by folks from all over the
world!Approximately 60 folks came through our hospitality room
on Saturdayevening to collect software for the switch and the
first release of theRATS Broadcast Server/Client programme
"BBC." Another score came through onSunday.  Everyone had a
chance to exchange ideas and experiences whileenjoying the
antics and humor.The presentations on the ROSE X.25 Switch and
OSI at the formal part of theconference were from people all
over the world.  This is an extremelyimportant turn of events.
Folks now come to this conference to presenttheir OSI protocol
experiences without prior contact with RATS or oursoftware.
Among other surprises, we discovered that Steve Pink, KF1Y,
andAnders Klements, SM0/RGV, have been working with the ISODE
OSI software,Further.  They also have been working with another
person on their staffwho has written another implementation of
X.25!  All in all it was asplendid conference with a lot of
progress for the ROSE X.25 Switch, OSIand other important
technologies needed by the amateur community.
    WD5IVD's Conference ReportThe 8th ARRL Computer Networking
Conference took place on the weekend ofOctober 7 in Colorado
Springs, Colorado, at the US Air Force Academy.  Theconference
was sponsored by TAPR, Academy Amateur Radio Club, USAFA
CadetRadio Club, Rocky Mountain Packet Radio Association
(RMPRA), and the ARRL.The event was organized by TAPR president
Andy Freeborn, N0/CCZ.  Mostpeople thought the conference was
the best one yet.  In attendance wereapproximately 150 amateurs
from across the country and the world includingsuch QTHs as
Canada, the Netherlands, Costa Rico, Italy, England,Australia,
Sweden, and Mexico. This year's proceedings encompassed HFpacket
radio, networking, applications and users, high-speed packet
radio,satellites, and other general packet-radio papers.A group
of conference attendees visited the Air Force Academy for a tour
onFriday.  The hospitality suite was well attended all day
Friday at theMarriott and saw numerous packet-radio (and other
discussions) break out.The actual conference was on Saturday
with talks starting promptly at 9:15AM, after an introduction by
N0/CCZ.  Paul Newland, AD7I, took on a newrole, that of
high-tech sergeant-at-arms.  With the use of "moderntechnology,"
Paul was able to let everyone know, in more than one way,before
the trap door opened for the speakers.  The system worked very
welland let everyone presenting have their fair share of time.
                      Conference PresentationsA discussion of
the ARRL HF design project was presented by Paul
Rinaldo,W4RI."HF Diversity" by Steve Hall, WM6P, described using
multiple receivers toimprove reception of HF packets."AMTEX,
NAVTEX-like Dissemination Procedures for Amateur Radio" by
PaulNewland, AD7I, described how AMTOR could be used to provide
betterdissemination of bulletins in the amateur community by
using a simplecoding scheme.An update on ROSE X.25 Switch
activity and a description of how it works byThomas Moulton,
W1VY."A Packet Broadcast Protocol" by Gordon Beattie, N2DSY,
presented abroadcast protocol for use in packet radio."Routing,
Oh Where is My International Routing" by Chuck Hast,
TI3DJT,presented a description of the current packet-radio
network in CentralAmerica and some of the problems encountered
to date in its construction."Amateur TCP/IP in 1989" by Phil
Karn, KA9Q, discussed the current statusof the KA9Q Internet
Protocol Package and other related projects.
                         (Continued next Part)          Gateway:
The ARRL Packet Radio Newsletter - Page 4 of 4
Volume 6 - Number 4 - November 3, 1989                  WD5IVD's
Conference Report - Continued"Callsign Server for the KA9Q
Internet Protocol Package on the AppleMacintosh" by Doug Tom,
N6OYU, and Dewayne Hendricks, WA8DZP, discussed aTCP/IP call
sign server, its implementation, and impact."Design of a
Next-Generation Packet Network" by Bdale Garbee, N3EUA, lookedat
technologies that have potential for impacting future
packet-radionetworks.  A preliminary proposal was made for an
example of this networkconfiguration to be installed in the
Rocky Mountain region."Application Software for Packet Radio" by
Robert Taylor, KA6NAN, andDewayne Hendricks, WA8DZP, discussed
the possibilities of applications foramateur packet radio.  A
packet-radio chess program for the Apple Macintoshcomputer was
used as an example."Protocol Level Eight -or- What About the
Users?" by Lyle Johnson, WA7GXD,asked if packet radio will be
useful to communicators or will it remain inthe domain of the
"techies?" Lyle discussed future implementations ofpacket radio
for the normal user."Thoughts on Adaptive Link Level Protocol"
by Lyle Johnson, WA7GXD,presented some new packet-radio issues.A
study by Roy Goud, N5RG, concerned the possible transmission
methods thatcould be used in high-speed packet-radio
networks."Implementation of a 1 MBPS Packet Data Link Using
10-GHz RF" by GlennElmore, N6GN, and Kevin Rowett, N6RCE,
presented the design andimplementation of an amateur
packet-radio data link operating at 1Megabit/s."The Implications
of High-Speed RF Networking" by Mike Chepponis, K3MC,Glenn
Elmore, N6GN, Bdale Garbee, N3EUA, Phil Karn, KA9Q, and Kevin
Rowett,N6RCE, discussed planning and the future applications for
high-speed RFnetworks."ATS-3 Packet Experiments: The Potential
Impact of Packet Radio UponPacific Basin Communications" by
Gerald Knezek, KB5EWV, and Greg Jones,WD5IVD, reported on work
being done at the University of North Texas toprovide low- cost
data communications via packet-radio LAN and WANcommunications
in the Pacific Basin."MicroSat Status Report" by Lyle Johnson,
WA7GXD, and Jon Bloom, KE3Z,discussed the current status of the
MicroSat project."Tucson Amateur Packet Radio packetRADIO
Project" by Greg Jones, WD5IVD,and Pete Eaton, WB9FLW, reviewed
the TAPR packetRADIO project."A Multi-Channel IBM PC Packet
Interface" by Henk Peek, PA0/HZP, discusseda universal
medium-speed packet-radio interface for the IBM/PC ISA
bus."Design and Implementation of an AppleTalk Local Area
Network Bridge UsingPacket Radio" by R. Ramsey and W. Kinsner,
VE4WK, discussed the design andimplementation of an LAN bridge
based on the link layer AX.25 packet-radioprotocol and the
AppleTalk Personal Network on the Apple Macintoshcomputer.
 Digital Committee Meeting and RMPRA Packet-Radio ConferenceOn
Sunday, the ARRL Digital Committee met and RMPRA held a
packet-radioconference (for more on the committee meeting, see
the previous issue ofGateway).  At the RMPRA conference,
Kantronics showed its new 2-meter,9600- baud packet radio and
demonstrated an alpha-test version of adual-port data-
over-radio platform.  DRSI showed layouts of theirimplementation
of the K3MC "Awesome I/O Card." PacComm was also
presentdisplaying its packet-radio product line.  Texas Packet
Radio Society(TPRS) answered question about TexNet and showed
TexNet hardware.  TAPRsold its products and Radio Amateur
Telecommunications Society (RATS)members were available
throughout the conference with their new softwarerelease.
                   GATEWAY CONTRIBUTIONSSubmissions for
publication in Gateway are welcome.  You may submitmaterial via
the US mail to:     Gateway     Stan Horzepa, WA1LOU     75
Kreger Drive     Wolcott, CT 06716-2702or electronically, via
CompuServe to user ID 70645,247 or via Internet
[e-mail].  Via telephone, your editor can be
reached onevenings and weekends at 203-879-1348 and he can
switch a modem on line toreceive text at 300, 1200 or 2400
bit/s.  (Personal messages may be sent toyour Gateway editor via
packet radio to: WA1LOU @ W1AW.)The deadline for each issue of
Gateway is the Saturday preceding the issuedate (which is
typically a Friday).                     REPRODUCTION OF GATEWAY
MATERIALMaterial may be excerpted from Gateway without prior
permission, providedthat the original contributor is credited
and Gateway is identified as thesource.-- Gary W. Sanders
(gws@n8emr or ...!osu-cis!n8emr!gws), 72277,1325N8EMR @ W8CQK
(ip addr) 44.70.0.1 [Ohio AMPR address
coordinator]HAM/SWL/SCANNER BBS (1200/2400/PEP)
614-457-4227------------------------------End of PACKET-RADIO
Digest V89 Issue
#247*****************************************24-Nov-89
22:33:15-MST,19246;000000000000Mail-From: KPETERSEN created at
24-Nov-89 22:27:34Return-Path:
<[e-mail]>Date: Fri, 24 Nov
89 22:27:33 MSTFrom:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: PACKET-RADIO Digest
V89 #248To: [e-mail]-RADIO
Digest         Fri, 24 Nov 89       Volume 89 : Issue 248Today's
Topics:                           gateway
11/17/89---------------------------------------------------------
-------------Date: 23 Nov 89 16:03:56 GMTFrom:
n8emr![e-mail]  (Gary Sanders)Subject: gateway
11/17/89=========================================================
=====|         Relayed from packet radio via                || N8EMR's
Ham BBS, 614-457-4227 (1200/2400/19.2 telebit,8N1)
|==============================================================
       Gateway: The ARRL Packet Radio Newsletter -  Part 1 of 4
                Volume 6 - Number 5 - November 17, 1989Published
by The American Radio Relay League          225 Main Street,
Newington, CT 06111          Stan Horzepa, WA1LOU - Editor
      SOUTHWEST OHIO DIGITAL SYMPOSIUM: CALL FOR PAPERSA
preliminary call for papers for the 4th Annual Southwest Ohio
DigitalSymposium has been announced.  The symposium will be on
January 20, 1990 atthe Middletown Campus of Miami University in
Middletown, Ohio.  At present,there is no set agenda nor time
frame.  Preliminary ideas, generated fromfeedback from last
year's event include: 1. A much-expanded session (probably a
concurrent separate session) on how    to get started in packet
radio, 2. Networking - the next steps, 3. SYSOPs' discussion
group, 4. MicroSat and other topics of interest concerning
satellites, 5. Alternatives to TNCs for handling node functions:
G8BPQ switch, TexNet    experience, next generation, etc, 6.
Super fast networking, 7. New PBBS software, 8. Duplex LANS, and
9. The TAPR packetRADIO.The symposium is a cooperative effort
hosted by the Engineering TechnologyDepartment of Miami
University, the Middletown DIAL Twisters (Dial RadioClub), the
Ohio Packet Council, and the Cincinnati Buckeye Netters.Please
send ideas to:     Hank Greeb, N8XX @ KC8TW     6580 Dry Ridge
Rd     Cincinnati, OH 45252  from Hank Greeb, N8XX via
CompuServe's HamNet                        JAS-1 OPERATION
TERMINATEDThe operation of Amateur Radio satellite
JAS-1/FUJI-OSCAR 12 was terminatedon November 5 because of low
power generation.  During the three-yearoperation of the
satellite, its power generation has decreased with timeand, at
present, its average power generation is less than 3 watts.The
Japanese Amateur Radio League reported, "It is our great
pleasure torealize that we were able to provide chances of
satellite communication,especially the flying BBS, and, taking
this opportunity, we thank allsatellite enthusiasts for having
contacted the bird.  Now we are preparingthe next bird, JAS-1b,
as the successor of FO-12, which has the samemission
configuration as that of FO-12 except for its orbit.  Please
lookforward to its launch in February 1990."             ARRL
RECEIVES FEMA GRANT FOR HF MODEM DEVELOPMENTThe ARRL recently
received a $10,000 grant from the Federal EmergencyManagement
Agency (FEMA) for HF packet-radio modem and protocol
developmentover the next two years.  The ARRL will use the grant
to fund out-of-pocketcosts (excluding labor or overhead) for
volunteer participants in thedevelopment program.  (FEMA has a
special interest in effectivecommunications between FEMA
representatives and Amateur Radio operators atthe onset of
natural disasters.)Existing packet-radio hardware and software
operate effectively above 30MHz.  At HF (3 to 30 MHz), however,
reception of packets is often poorbecause of fading and
interference.  The purpose of the FEMA grant is toencourage
development of techniques to improve the reliability of
HFpacket-radio reception.  The ARRL has identified several areas
for researchto improve reliability and reduce retransmissions:
modems, protocols,diversity reception and network management
techniques.Designers or design teams wishing to participate in
this program areinvited to contact Lori Weinberg at ARRL
headquarters.  Mail a resume ofeach person in the team giving
qualifications in the above areas ofresearch and a brief
description of the design approach (not to exceedthree pages,
double-spaced).  Formal proposals are not sought at this
time,but will be requested in the near future.         Gateway:
The ARRL Packet Radio Newsletter -  Part 2 of 4
Volume 6 - Number 5 - November 17, 1989
UoSAT-D PCE PLANS ANNOUNCEDThe UoSAT-D PACSAT Communications
Experiment (PCE) will be an open-accessAmateur Radio
store-and-forward system (UoSAT-D is scheduled for launch
inJanuary along with a second UoSAT and four AMSAT MicroSats).
Althoughthere will certainly be some gateway stations (since
they are efficient andcost-effective), any properly equipped
amateur station will be able to usethe PCE.A ground station for
the PCE must have a G3RUH-compatible, 9600- bit/secPSK modem.
This modem should be connected to a Mode-J satellite
station:145.975-MHz uplink and 435.070-MHz downlink.  This modem
and RF equipmentmust be connected to a TNC.  Ground station
antenna and RF powerrequirements should be modest; final
satellite receiver sensitivity andantenna pattern measurements
are now under way at University of Surrey.To access the PCE
PBBS, you will need special software running on yourground
station computer.  The PACSAT Ground Station Software
willcommunicate with the PCE over your AX.25 TNC using high-
level protocolscurrently under development by Jeff Ward,
G0//K8KA, and Harold Price, NK6K.This system, ie, requiring you
to connect your TNC to a host program andnot to a terminal
emulator, will provide a powerful electronic mail servicethat
eliminates many of the frustrations experienced by users of
theexisting ground-based PBBS network.  (The standard PACSAT
protocols willalso be implemented on the AMSAT-NA Microsats,
although not using9600-bit/sec PSK modulation.)Full details of
the PACSAT protocols will be published as soon as they
areavailable.  (A Broadcast Protocol specification, for
transmission ofbulletins, etc, has already been published in the
proceedings of DATASPACE'89.) When published, the protocol
specifications will allow softwareauthors to begin implementing
the PACSAT Ground Station Software fordifferent computers.  It
is also likely that a PACSAT Ground StationSoftware
implementation for IBM-PC compatible computers will be produced
byUoSAT and AMSAT-NA and made available to other amateurs.from
Jeff Ward, G0/K8KA @ GB3UP.UK.EU via CompuServe's HamNet  TANDY
COLOR COMPUTER PACKET-RADIO TERMINAL EMULATION SOFTWARE
AVAILABLECoCoPACT/CoPACT3 are two full-featured terminal
programs designed foramateur digital communications using the
Tandy TRS-80 Color Computer 1, 2or 3 and a TNC or multimode
controller.  The software features split-screenoperation with
received data displayed in the upper screen and localkeyboard
data displayed in the lower screen.  Special handling of
TNCcontrol codes, stream/channel switches and other TNC
functions are providedto simplify control of the TNC.  The
programs include a 40-kbyte QSO bufferand ten user-defineable
macro keys.  A built-in editor can be used tocreate and edit
incoming and outgoing data off-line.While CoCoPACT is intended
for all Color Computers, CoPACT3 is intended forthe Color
Computer model 3 only and features 80- column display,
anadditional 24-kbyte transmit buffer, and a selectable
2400-baud serial-portdata rate.  The programs are available on
disk or tape from Monty W. Haley,WJ5W, Rt 1, Box 210-B, Evening
Shade, AR 72532.  Contact him for details.
W0RLI MAILBOX VERSION 11.5 AVAILABLEW0/RLI Mailbox, Version
11.5, a PBBS for IBM PC and compatible computers isavailable for
downloading from CompuServe's HamNet data library 9
(DL9),N1EDF's telephone BBS (508-949-3590), Pleasant Valley
Phone BBS(508-688-1348), VE3GYQ's telephone BBS (519-660-1442),
or is available ondisk from TAPR (PO Box 12925, Tucson, AZ
85732).  (File name FS1105.EXE isthe fast upgrade for those who
already have Version 11.4, while file nameMB1105.EXE is the
full-blown version.)               NAVAL ACADEMY PACKET-RADIO
LINK IN OPERATIONFor those who would like to forward
packet-radio messages to midshipmen atthe Naval Academy in
Annapolis, the K1LNJ PBBS in Severn, Maryland, willpass the
messages to the midshipmen's computer in their Bancroft HX==59To
start the service, advise the midshipman to open a "mailbox"
with CMS bycalling up FISHNET using their existing ProComm
software.  At the ACU>prompt, enter ALT-P.  Select option 5
(9600 and E-7-1) to change theprotocol and save the changes.
Return to the ACU> prompt and type CFISHNET.  Once connected,
type C CMS and log on as NEW.  In a couple daysthe midshipman's
ID will be validated and thereafter, he or she can postand
receive messages.To send a packet-radio message to the
midshipman, address the message asNTS to USNA @ K1LNJ.  Be sure
to include the midshipman's "Username" on theCMS link (usually
the first letter of the first name and the first sixletters of
the last name).  Midshipmen should address their return
messagesto "BHOWARD" and include the recipient's call sign and @
PBBS.  Anyquestions should be addressed to K1LNJ @ K1LNJ
(available from the DCA nodestack in the Virginia-Maryland-DC
area), or for long haul (HF), via K1LNJ @N4QQ or K1LNJ @ W3IWI.
from Bill Howard, K1LNJ         Gateway: The ARRL Packet Radio
Newsletter -  Part 3 of 4                  Volume 6 - Number 5 -
November 17, 1989       PACKET-RADIO OPERATIONS DURING THE SAN
FRANCISCO EARTHQUAKE:                  LESSONS LEARNED,
SUGGESTED IMPROVEMENTSLew Jenkins, N6VV, is a member of the
Northern California PacketAssociation, which is composed of an
extensive packet-radio network made upof hilltop node locations
and over 30 PBBSs spread from Redding in northernCalifornia to
Kern County in the central part of the state.As one of the PBBS
SYSOPs for the network, Lew was involved in handlingheavy
amounts of health and welfare traffic generated immediately
after theOctober earthquake in the San Francisco Bay area.
After the dust hadsettled a bit, Lew wrote down his thoughts
about the performance of thepacket-radio network and lessons
learned from the emergency created by theearthquake.  Here is a
summary of his observations and recommendations: o  Have a
network backup plan in place in anticipation of emergency
situations. o  Packet radio is well designed to handle high
volumes of health and    welfare traffic during emergencies.
Tactical communication, however,    is better handled by voice.
o  Because of networking possibilities, packet-radio networks
can respond    better than any other form of amateur
communications to changes in the    emergency situations.
Members of the Northern California Packet    Association were
able to completely reroute traffic throughout the    entire
system in less than three hours. o  There is a need for an
emergency bulletin designator, supported, but    used only in
extreme emergencies. o  Every amateur using PBBSs should be
familiar with packet-radio NTS    procedures.  Circumstances
generated by the earthquake required as many    hams as possible
with packet-radio capability to become involved with    handling
traffic. o  All NTS traffic should be ZIP code routed.  A major
problem was    incorrectly addressed or unaddressed traffic
requiring manual    intervention.Lew feels that the San
Francisco earthquake was "the first great test forthis new
packet-radio technology" and, in general, passed the test
withflying colors.  As of October 21, approximately 3000 health
and welfaremessages were posted on the N6VV PBBS and 2200 of
them had been delivered.At one point, all of the messages were
carried through the network on220.90 MHz.from The ARRL LetterHOW
TO USE A WHITE PAGES SERVERThe WA1IIE.ME BBS is now a
White-Pages Cache-Server.  It stores (andforwards) information
about stations, their home PBBSs, etc.  The followingcommands
are used by the server:     I CALL Query the local database for
all information     concerning a call sign.  For example: I
N1HAM.     I@ BBS List users at home PBBS.  Trailing * may be
used as a wild            card.  For example: I@ W9ZRZ or I@ HB*
    IA List all users.     IC List all users that have logged
in.     IL List local users of this mailbox.     IZ ZIP List
users at a ZIP code.  Trailing * may be used as a wild
 card.  For example: IZ 950*To get information concerning a call
sign, etc, you send apersonal message from your home PBBS as
follows:     SP REQWP @ WA1IIE.ME.USA     Subject:  Leave blank
   Message:  Your request goes here, for example, to get the
"address" of     WA1ABC, the stations at ZIP code 0498*, and the
stations whose home     PBBS is K1RQG, your request would be as
follows:     I WA1ABC     IZ 0498*        I@ K1RQG
<CTRL-Z>As with all servers, the PBBS will create a message
containingthe requested information and send it to you at the
PBBS whereyour request was initiated.  If you have any
questions, contactWA1IIE @ WA1IIE.ME.USA.  from Chuck Sullivan,
WA1IIE         Gateway: The ARRL Packet Radio Newsletter -  Part
4 of 4                  Volume 6 - Number 5 - November 17, 1989
                      US PACKET-RADIO STATISTICSThe following
represents the number of PBBSs and digipeaters in the
UnitedStates as of November 1, according to the statistics
maintained by DougBennett, K4NGC.  Send any changes to K4NGC @
K4NGC.State                 PBBS  Digipeater  Total   US
Percent--------------------- ----  ----------  -----
----------Alabama                31       35        66
2.02%Alaska                  8       20        28
0.86%Arizona                40       24        64
1.96%Arkansas               14       21        35
1.07%California            169      146       315
9.63%Colorado               49       70       119
3.64%Connecticut            22       24        46
1.41%Delaware                4        3         7
0.21%District of Columbia    0        0         0
0.00%Florida                99       94       193
5.90%Georgia                31       28        59
1.80%Guam                    0        0         0
0.00%Hawaii                 11       10        21
0.64%Idaho                   7        7        14
0.43%Illinois               46       67       113
3.45%Indiana                56       58       114
3.49%Iowa                   24       18        42
1.28%Kansas                 23       11        34
1.04%Kentucky               22       42        64
1.96%Louisiana              19        4        23
0.70%Maine                  23       21        44
1.35%Maryland               84       69       153
4.68%Massachusetts          41       46        87
2.66%Michigan               50       31        81
2.48%Minnesota              18       25        43
1.31%Mississippi            12        9        21
0.64%Missouri               26       44        70
2.14%Montana                16       21        37
1.13%Nebraska               12       14        26
0.79%Nevada                  3       14        17       0.52%New
Hampshire          17       25        42       1.28%New Jersey
          79       48       127       3.88%New Mexico
 19       13        32       0.98%New York              113
 92       205       6.27%North Carolina         23       26
  49       1.50%North Dakota            7        5        12
  0.37%Ohio                   74       59       133
4.07%Oklahoma               18       27        45
1.38%Oregon                 14       13        27
0.83%Pennsylvania           70       49       119
3.64%Puerto Rico             0        2         2
0.06%Rhode Island            5        3         8
0.24%South Carolina         21       11        32
0.98%South Dakota            6        6        12
0.37%Tennessee              28       19        47
1.44%Texas                  64       32        96
2.93%Utah                   10       22        32
0.98%Vermont                10        7        17
0.52%Virginia               51       76       127
3.88%Virgin Islands          0        0         0
0.00%Washington             33       20        53
1.62%West Virginia          11       14        25
0.76%Wisconsin              35       22        57
1.74%Wyoming                13       16        29       0.89%
                  ----   ------    ------   ---------Total
         1686     1584      3271     100.00%
"TEMPORARY" PACKET-RADIO ADDRESSUntil further notice, your
Gateway editor's packet-radio mail-forwardingaddress is WA1LOU @
N1DCS.  Also, mail to your Gateway editor may be sentvia the
TCP/IP packet-radio network to IP address 44.88.0.14.
               GATEWAY CONTRIBUTIONSSubmissions for publication
in Gateway are welcome.  You may submitmaterial via the US mail
to:     Gateway     Stan Horzepa, WA1LOU     75 Kreger Drive
Wolcott, CT 06716-2702or electronically, via CompuServe to user
ID 70645,247 or via Internet [e-mail].  Via
telephone, your editor can be reached onevenings and weekends at
203-879-1348 and he can switch a modem on line toreceive text at
300, 1200 or 2400 bit/s.  (Personal messages may be sent toyour
Gateway editor via packet radio to WA1LOU @ N1DCS or IP
address44.88.0.14.)The deadline for each issue of Gateway is the
Saturday preceding the issuedate (which is typically a Friday).
                   REPRODUCTION OF GATEWAY MATERIALMaterial may
be excerpted from Gateway without prior permission, providedthat
the original contributor is credited and Gateway is identified
as thesource.-- Gary W. Sanders (gws@n8emr or
...!osu-cis!n8emr!gws), 72277,1325N8EMR @ W8CQK (ip addr)
44.70.0.1 [Ohio AMPR address coordinator]HAM/SWL/SCANNER BBS
(1200/2400/PEP) 614-457-4227------------------------------End of
PACKET-RADIO Digest V89 Issue
#248*****************************************25-Nov-89
19:23:19-MST,8889;000000000000Return-Path:
<[e-mail]>Date: Sat, 25 Nov
89 19:15:26 MSTFrom:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: PACKET-RADIO Digest
V89 #249To: [e-mail]-RADIO
Digest         Sat, 25 Nov 89       Volume 89 : Issue 249Today's
Topics:                  Clarkson 3C501 DRVR and Desqview??
               HF BBSs considered obnoxious
Information about KISS-56 wanted            MFJ-1270B/MFJ-1274,
Virus/Bug/Hardware defect?                          NOS for SCO
Xenix                      TAPR 9600 RAdio/Modems???

TexNet-----------------------------------------------------------
-----------Date: 24 Nov 89 04:50:32 GMTFrom:
image.soe.clarkson.edu![e-mail]  (Russ Nelson)Subject:
Clarkson 3C501 DRVR and Desqview??In article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Pat Davis) writes:
 This is probably an OLD question.. I use the Clarkson 3C501
driver with   NET (ala KA9Q).  The driver works well except if I
try to run the whole mess   in Desqview, my disk interrupt gets
clobbered (requests to the hard drive   time out/abort).There is
an E-mail address for reporting bugs in the packet drivers
givenin README.DOC.  Use it.  Not just you, everybody.----russ
(nelson@clutx [.bitnet | .clarkson.edu])Live up to the light
thou hast, and more will be granted thee.A recession now appears
more than 2 years away -- John D. Mathon, 4 Oct 1989.I think
killing is value-neutral in and of itself. -- Gary Strand, 8 Nov
1989.Liberals run this country, by and large. -- Clayton Cramer,
20 Nov 1989.------------------------------Date: 26 Nov 89
01:38:38 GMTFrom:
brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!uwm.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.e
du!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu![e-mail]: HF BBSs
considered obnoxious> One presumes, of course, that these people
have gone to the trouble of> obtaining an STA waiver from the
FCC; clearly they are operating> unattended - for which that is
required.Can someone post the list of stations who have been
issued the STA?--Phil Howard,
KA9WGN--<[e-mail]>------------------------------Date
: 21 Nov 89 16:10:37 GMTFrom:
mitel!sce!cognos!dgbt![e-mail]  (Barry Mclarnon
DGBT/DIP)Subject: Information about KISS-56 wantedFrom article
<[e-mail]>, by [e-mail]
(Ari Husa OH8NUP):> > Also, the ad stated a few TNC's to be
fully TNC-2 compatible, and to> accept the KISS-56 firmware. The
PK-88 was not mentioned, do you know> if it is compatible? Most
of people over here in Finland have a TAPR> TNC-2 clone, which
unfortunately has no connection for an external> modem, so we
are probably going to have to get a new TNC, too. That> will, of
course, add the total cost, and makes the WA4DSY solution> much
less attractive.I assume that by "connection for an external
modem" you mean the modemdisconnect header.  Lacking this is not
a problem, since the DSY modemdoes not connect to it anyway - it
does not provide all the signals needed,and in particular lacks
an input for an external tx clock.  You mustconnect the modem to
various points on the TNC board... this will involvesome track
cutting, but it should be possible to make it work with anyTNC
that uses the SIO or SCC (8530) chip.  However, in order to run
KISS-56,your TNC must be "firmware compatible" with the TNC-2.
Your clone shouldbe ok (I hope it's one licenced by TAPR!), but
the PK-88 may not be.  GRAPESprovides source to KISS-56, so you
could hack it if necessary.  If you areplanning to use the modem
with PC compatibles, you are probably better offto forget the
TNC idea and instead get the K3MC board.  It should beavailable
from Pac-Comm by the time you get your modems built.>     73 de
Luru> --> >     ///   Ari Husa OH8NUP
[e-mail]73, Barry VE3JF-- Barry McLarnon
Communications Research Center    Ottawa, ON   CanadaUUCP:
...utzoo!bnr-vpa!bnr-rsc!dgbt!barry   INTERNET:
[e-mail]$erve: 71470,3651     Packet radio:
VE3JF @ VE3JF------------------------------Date: 25 Nov 89
05:41:55 GMTFrom:
van-bc!ubc-cs!alberta!adec23![e-mail]  (Mark
Salyzyn)Subject: MFJ-1270B/MFJ-1274, Virus/Bug/Hardware
defect?Well, I've just heard from rather unreliable sources that
the MFJ TNC 2 cloneshave an opening in them for a virus when set
with digipeat on. Frankly, myself,I just assume that
inexperienced users either A) don't know what the TNC isdoing,
so don't know what they've set, or B) batteries/hardware going
bad sounit acts flaky. In our area they blame the problem on Mr
NOCALL (a notoriousflake who upsets local traffic). They claim
he is using a `feature' (bug) inthe MFJ TNC 2 clones that allow
`certain' parameters to be adjusted ordefaulted remotely while
the TNC is digipeat on. Well, any wisdom out there?I have
purchased (but not delivered yet) a used MFJ-1270B and would
like tocombat/understand the problem.73 de VE6MGS, Ciao,-- Mark
Salyzyn   alberta!adec23!mark    (VE6MGS @ WD5B)-- Ciao,-- Mark
Salyzyn @ alberta!adec23!mark------------------------------Date:
23 Nov 89 18:50:44 GMTFrom:
mcsun!ukc!slxsys!qtnet![e-mail]  (Nick Lawes)Subject:
NOS for SCO XenixWell, I finally got around to trying to port
the latest NOS src (fromwb3ffv's BBS) to Xenix. The files from
there have no unix support, nodocumentation etc, so I'm poking
around in the dark, and using so *OLD*unix support files that
someone had lying around.Has anyone successfully (or partially)
done a port to SCO? I'd hate tobe wasting my time :-) Will there
ever be official support for Unix?Also, is there any
documentation, hints for porting etc. Some sample config files
would help.So far I have managed to get the code to compile and
start running. Therewere major problems getting to this stage,
especially getting mainprocto work with the adjusted stack
pointer referencing pages in memorythat don't (yet) exist etc...
I can trace packets on air, but as soon isI try to start up a
telnet (for example) the system crashes. newproc()must work to
some degree, because the four or five initial daemons arethere
and running (timer etc..)Anyone know of a fix, or what I'm doing
wrong? It's bound to be eithersomething stupid that I've
overlooked, or something fundamental I don'tunderstand...I just
love the use of pause() and alarm() internal functions, they go
wellwhen porting to unix :-)Thanks in advance for any help
...73s-- [     Nick Lawes, Systems Programmer     | voice:
[phone]    ][ Technical Marketing, Quotnet (UK) Ltd. |
email: ..!mcvax!ukc!qtnet!nick ][  12 Norwich Street, London.
EC4a 1BP  | ham  :       G8ZHR @ GB3XP
]------------------------------Date: 25 Nov 89 01:38:58 GMTFrom:
cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!phil@tut.
cis.ohio-state.eduSubject: TAPR 9600 RAdio/Modems???> I don't
mean to deride Phil's herculean efforts: far from it. The KA9Q>
package is a monumental effort, and one that I couldn't
duplicate in> years. Despite all that, it's not a production
program: it's a hack. A> neat hack, to be sure, but a hack.> >
We don't need hacks. We need production systems.What constitutes
a production system?Let me guess, you want to PAY for it, and
also have 24hr/7day/52weektech support.--Phil Howard,
KA9WGN--<[e-mail]>------------------------------Date
: 24 Nov 89 21:20:55 GMTFrom:
cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!usc!oxy![e-mail]
(Bryan Douglas Reeves)Subject: TexNetIn Article
<[e-mail]>, Mr. Wolf writes>"We would LOVE to put
together a fast, reliable backbone..."Has anyone considered the
TexNet packet switching network foruse in their area?  Yes, I
know that the

 local links run at ONLY 1200bps and the backbone runs at
9600bps, but it works, no?If you want more info, there was an
article in 73 about it a few monthsago.  Of course, if you
aren't disposed to buying anyone else's work,you could sit down
and develop it on your own - maybe someone willput together a
TexNet -style network with access local access atmultiple rates
(1200 baud included - many of us students can't exactlyshell out
$800+ for a 52kbps modem and dedicated radio) with a
backbonerunning at 56kbps or higher.Any takers?B. Douglas
Reeves         [e-mail]"Wish me luck - my Tech exam is
tommorow!"------------------------------End of PACKET-RADIO
Digest V89 Issue
#249*****************************************26-Nov-89
17:19:23-MST,8167;000000000000Return-Path:
<[e-mail]>Date: Sun, 26 Nov
89 17:15:26 MSTFrom:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: PACKET-RADIO Digest
V89 #250To: [e-mail]-RADIO
Digest         Sun, 26 Nov 89       Volume 89 : Issue 250Today's
Topics:            Calling all KA9Q Xenix/Unix Porters/Users....
                         help with pc noise
     MFJ-1278 Trouble                       Multicoupling DSY
modems       simple PK-232 controller (like PAKRATT) for
Unix/Xenix?                  TAPR 9600 RAdio/Modems??? (3
msgs)------------------------------------------------------------
----------Date: 26 Nov 89 14:22:46 GMTFrom:
attctc!mjbtn![e-mail]  (Mark J. Bailey)Subject:
Calling all KA9Q Xenix/Unix Porters/Users....Hello,I am trying
to build a list of those persons developing, porting,
and/orusing Phil's KA9Q package on Unix/Xenix.  Since installing
the system(s)on Unix introduces portability difficulties when
going to a different version of Unix (like Ultrix), I would like
to know those of us that areinvolved with the Unix end of things
and KA9Q.  Please email a simpleresponse, and if you would, what
Unix/Xenix version you work with, andwhat version on Phil's
package you are working with.Down the road, I may implement a
mailing list on my system of KA9Q Unix/Xenix people for faster
collaboration on porting woes.Thanks in advance for your
cooperation!Mark.-- Mark J. Bailey, N4XHX
     "Ya'll com bak naw, ya hear!"USMAIL: 511 Memorial Blvd.,
Murfreesboro, TN 37129 ___________________________VOICE:  +1 615
893 0098                            |         JobSoftUUCP:
...!{ames,mit-eddie}!attctc!mjbtn!mjb      | Design &
Development Co.DOMAIN: [e-mail]        CIS:
76314,160 |  Murfreesboro, TN
USA------------------------------Date: 26 Nov 89 23:03:35
GMTFrom: [e-mail]  (Ted Medin)Subject: help with pc
noise Have my pc hooked up to the hf rig but notice the pc
causes noise onthe hf bands, particularly noticable on 10 m. The
pc is about 7 ft from the rig with a coax cable between. So any
suggestions on how to suppress thepc's radition???73,
tedn6trf------------------------------Date: Sun, 26 Nov 89
13:15:45 EDTFrom: Joseph Skoler <[e-mail]>Subject:
MFJ-1278 Trouble. S~, @-&1~, <. S~, @-&1~, <. S~, @-&1~, <A
ETransfer aborted by otherside._I have been experiencing yet
another problem with my MFJ 1278 - Iwonder if anyone has any
suggestions.   I run the MFJ in KISS modewhile running NET.  It
seems after running for some time the unitpops out of kiss mode
for no apparrent reason.  I can't seem to figureout what
immediately precedes this; it happens sometimes 2minutes after
being reset and sometimes days after.  I thought maybeit was a
transient power supply voltage drop, so I have the thing
hookedup to an external supply that I know doesn't fluxuate.  I
thought maybe thelithium battery was weak, so I have two
Duracells supplying the 3 voltsbackup.Anyone have any hints or
suggestions?Thanks in advance,   Joseph Skoler,  skohc@cunyvm,
kc2yu------------------------------Date: 24 Nov 89 14:43:26
GMTFrom: mitel!sce!cognos!dgbt![e-mail]  (Barry
Mclarnon DGBT/DIP)Subject: Multicoupling DSY modemsFrom article
<[e-mail]>, by [e-mail]:> Correct me
IF I'm wrong. Can you not run a DSY modem in full duplex> mode,
WITHOUT a PC/TNC some how??  I suppose you'd still need a method
of> Identification for the FCC..  I confess, I haven't thought
this all the way> through.Yes indeed.  Here in Ottawa we have a
full-duplex DSY repeater ready to hitthe airwaves.  It receives
on 220.55 and retransmits on 433.55.  In order tominimize the
key-up time, the transmit side of the modem runs continuouslyand
only the external transmit converter is keyed (by the DCD).  I
designeda little interface board which provides a small FIFO to
re-time the receiveddata, a watchdog timer, and a bit of logic
to provide a tee connection to afuture packet switch.It
works!Barry-- Barry McLarnon    Communications Research Center
 Ottawa, ON   CanadaUUCP: ...utzoo!bnr-vpa!bnr-rsc!dgbt!barry
INTERNET:  [e-mail]$erve: 71470,3651
Packet radio:  VE3JF @ VE3JF------------------------------Date:
26 Nov 89 17:16:55 GMTFrom: attctc!mjbtn![e-mail]
(Mark J. Bailey)Subject: simple PK-232 controller (like PAKRATT)
for Unix/Xenix?Hello All,Does anyone know of and/or have a
package that works like the PAKRATTprogram (MSDOS) that
interface with a PK-232 to make controlling it much nicer?Any
info would be greatly appreciated.Thanks in advance.Mark.-- Mark
J. Bailey, N4XHX                             "Ya'll com bak naw,
ya hear!"USMAIL: 511 Memorial Blvd., Murfreesboro, TN 37129
___________________________VOICE:  [phone]
             |         JobSoftUUCP:
...!{ames,mit-eddie}!attctc!mjbtn!mjb      | Design &
Development Co.DOMAIN: [e-mail]        CIS:
76314,160 |  Murfreesboro, TN
USA------------------------------Date: 26 Nov 89 01:03:21
GMTFrom: nuchat!moray!splut![e-mail]  (Jay "you ignorant
splut!" Maynard)Subject: TAPR 9600 RAdio/Modems???In article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:>> We
don't need hacks. We need production systems.>What constitutes a
production system?>Let me guess, you want to PAY for it, and
also have 24hr/7day/52week>tech support.Hardly. IN this case,
all I want is to be able to hand someone a disk,tell them to
RTFM, and be confident that they'll be able to get it onthe air
without a lot of hacking.-- Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL
| Never ascribe to malice that which [e-mail]
    (eieio)| adequately be explained by
stupidity.{attctc,bellcore}!texbell!splut!jay
+---------------------------------------- "...when hasn't
gibberish been legal C?" -- Tom Horsley,
[e-mail]------------------------------Date: 26 Nov 89
03:16:27 GMTFrom: mnetor!utzoo![e-mail]  (Henry
Spencer)Subject: TAPR 9600 RAdio/Modems???>> I don't mean to
deride Phil's herculean efforts: far from it. The KA9Q>> package
is a monumental effort, and one that I couldn't duplicate in>>
years. Despite all that, it's not a production program: it's a
hack. A>> neat hack, to be sure, but a hack.Curious, it's in use
as a production program in a great many places, withquite
satisfactory results.  For example, this message is coming to
youcourtesy of our homebrew terminal server, running a peculiar
mixture ofUnix V7 and a positively antediluvian KA9Q.  It has
flaws, but it getsthe bytes through.-- That's not a joke, that's
     |     Henry Spencer at U of Toronto ZoologyNASA.  -Nick
Szabo             | uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry
[e-mail]------------------------------Date: 26 Nov
89 07:32:28 GMTFrom:
bnrgate!bigsur!bnr-fos!bnr-vpa!utzoo![e-mail]  (Henry
Spencer)Subject: TAPR 9600 RAdio/Modems???In article
<C6#[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Jay "you
ignorant splut!" Maynard) writes:>>> We don't need hacks. We
need production systems.>>What constitutes a production
system?>...IN this case, all I want is to be able to hand
someone a disk,>tell them to RTFM, and be confident that they'll
be able to get it on>the air without a lot of hacking.Few of the
"production systems" in the world satisfy this criterion.Would
that they did...-- That's not a joke, that's      |     Henry
Spencer at U of Toronto ZoologyNASA.  -Nick Szabo             |
uunet!attcan!utzoo!henry
[e-mail]------------------------------End of
PACKET-RADIO Digest V89 Issue
#250*****************************************27-Nov-89
04:17:25-MST,10250;000000000000Return-Path:
<[e-mail]>Date: Mon, 27 Nov
89 04:15:22 MSTFrom:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: PACKET-RADIO Digest
V89 #251To: [e-mail]-RADIO
Digest         Mon, 27 Nov 89       Volume 89 : Issue 251Today's
Topics:                          AA4RE BB v2.7 ftp?
    Callsign server - need information
PE1CHL NET for PC                  TAPR 9600 RAdio/Modems??? (3
msgs)------------------------------------------------------------
----------Date: 27 Nov 89 08:47:46 GMTFrom:
eru!luth!sunic!tut!santra!kolvi.hut.fi![e-mail]
(Kaj Wiik)Subject: AA4RE BB v2.7 ftp?>          Gateway: The
ARRL Packet Radio Newsletter - Page 1 of 4>
Volume 6 - Number 4 - November 3, 1989>>
  NEW SOFTWARE RELEASES>>AA4RE's BB, Version 2.7, a PBBS for IBM
PC and compatible computers is>available for downloading from
CompuServe's HamNet data library 9 (DL9),Is BB v2.7 available
from any of the ftp
fileservers?Kaj------------------------------Date: 27 Nov 89
00:12 PSTFrom: Ralf Werner
<[e-mail]>Subject
: Callsign server - need informationHello out there. I just read
a brief note about a sort of callsign database,I think it was
something like "marvin.cs.buffalo.edu". I am new to this list,so
would anybody be so kind and send me information about this
service?Thank you.                                        Ralf[
Ralf Werner - WERNER%VAX1.INFORMATIK.FH-REGENSBURG.DBP.DE@UNIDO
(UUCP)      ][  (DF1RW)    -         "                     "
       @RELAY.CS.NET      ][                  Insert your
favourite cookie here
]------------------------------Date: 26 Nov 89 18:30:03 GMTFrom:
fox!portal!cup.portal.com![e-mail]  (R A
Lingelbach)Subject: PE1CHL NET for PCI have some observations
from a few days of running the PC version
of871225.33.PE1CHL.890814.  WD6EHR may have some comments to
add, as hehas been running essentially the same program, for the
ATARI, longerthan I.Disadvantages of PE1CHL NET:1. No ax25
mailbox2. No netrom verbose off (but get around it by using
netrom tcpip normal,    to turn off broadcast of non #ip
nodes)3. No smtp trace function (really miss this
one).Advantages:1.  No finger format bug 2.  Control blocks back
to 4 chars (hooray!)3.  Temp files erased4.  Record <filename>
works with ftp & finger sessions5.  Trace to <filename> works6.
Source command reads separate commands file7.  MHeard function
expanded8.  AX25 callsign handling allows different SSID on
different     interfaces9.  Digipeater function enhanced for
gatewaying10. Flow command implemented: incoming input not
printed when user     is typing on an interactive connection.11.
AX25 port command added to allow ax25 servers.    KB6CUN-0  =
normal keyboard->keyboard connects (yawn)                (2m or
220)    KB6CUN-5  = NetDigi 2m->220      KB6CUN-6  = NetDigi
220->2m    KB6CUN-7  = MHeard server, 2m or 220    KB6CUN-8  =
Conference bridge #1    KB6CUN-9  = Conference bridge #2
         the conference bridges allow multiple users a
       roundtable qso, with some interactive commands:
        //connect call [interface]
//disconnect call [interface]                   //interface
(prints a list of interfaces--mine are 2m
        & 220)                   //mheard [interface] sends
mheard list of specified                     interface, or
defaults to interface of connection                   //users
               ///any text: passes //any text to users12.  RCMD
server: This looks very interesting & powerful--allows a user
  complete control of NET remotely, supposedly.I had stated
previously that the inability to address the COMporthardware
directly, with the attach command, was undesirable; I havehad to
wean myself from interrupt-hungry programs like Symphony
andSideKick Plus, in order to load the interrupt handler MBBIOS
and haveNET work.The version of NET I was running before this
was 890421.1.--RobUUCP:
sun!portal!cup.portal.com!roblingelbachINTERNET:
[e-mail]:      [e-mail]
[44.16.0.106]PACKET RADIO: KB6CUN@K6IYK.#SOCAL.USA.NACOMPUSERVE:
  71101,176-------Rob Lingelbach          [phone]
(voice)2641 Rinconia Dr              464-0827 (data)Los Angeles,
CA 90068------------------------------Date: 24 Nov 89 19:26:58
GMTFrom: mitel!sce!cognos!dgbt![e-mail]  (Barry
Mclarnon DGBT/DIP)Subject: TAPR 9600 RAdio/Modems???From article
<[e-mail]>, by [e-mail] (John G. De Armond):> We'd
LOVE to see the DSY modem as a commercial product.  The problem
is> that EVERY DAMN VENDOR that has approached us that I'm aware
of (and I> do spend a lot of time on the sidelines these days)
had demanded > EXCLUSIVE RIGHTS to the modem.  In other words,
they want to lock the> rest of the world out of 56kb.  I'll lay
odds that anybody else that> tries to commercialize a ham
product is running into the same thing.I don't find this at all
surprising, or necessarily a Bad Thing.  Thevendors no doubt
feel that the market for 56kb boxes is relatively smallcompared
to, say, TNCs, and that it's not worth their while to get in
ifthey have to carve it up with other vendors.  Similar
situation with thePS-186, but that didn't stop SANDPAC from
licencing it to AEA.  Perhaps acompromise can be struck, such as
making the licence exclusive for onlya limited period of time,
such as a year.  Throw in a few other provisos,e.g., that the
licence is revoked if the product doesn't materializewithin a
certain time span, and that GRAPES retains the rights to
sellmodem kits to individual experimenters.  I firmly believe
that with 9.6kbgear and fast switch hardware becoming readily
available, somebody willwanna grab that 56kb carrot.>
JohnBarry-- Barry McLarnon    Communications Research Center
Ottawa, ON   CanadaUUCP: ...utzoo!bnr-vpa!bnr-rsc!dgbt!barry
INTERNET:  [e-mail]$erve: 71470,3651
Packet radio:  VE3JF @ VE3JF------------------------------Date:
24 Nov 89 18:46:36 GMTFrom:
mitel!sce!cognos!dgbt![e-mail]  (Barry Mclarnon
DGBT/DIP)Subject: TAPR 9600 RAdio/Modems???From article
<[e-mail]>, by [e-mail] (Phil
Karn):>>If you get an organization together that will build the
DSY modems and put>>the whole thing together in a package where
someone can just BUY IT and PLUG>>IT IN, then they will take off
like a rocket and will become the new standard.> > Mark, I
actually happen to agree with you. Perhaps you can lend your
voice> to mine (which is getting rather hoarse) to encourage
GRAPES (and WA4DSY) to> license their design to commercial
manufacturers, on a non-exclusive basis,> so it can be produced
in quantity and gain mass acceptance.  Production and> marketing
is the one place where the GRAPES/WA4DSY modem has really
fallen> down so far. I've been calling this modem "packet
radio's best kept secret"> for some time.I'll add my voice to
the appeal.  Like Phil, I'm a True Believer in theWA4DSY modem.
It would be a real shame if something as useful and
aswell-engineered as this modem doesn't catch on in a big way.
I think some ofthe reasons it hasn't are psychological,
e.g.:People are a lot more inclined towards plunking down their
bucks at theirlocal ham emporium, for a shiny box they can take
home with them, than tosend their hard-earned off to a PO Box
somewhere.When you're used to thinking of a modem in terms of a
$5 chip in a TNC, thethought of spending $250 on a modem, in kit
form no less, takes a littlegetting used to.Ditto for spending
$250 or more for a transverter, when you can put up alow-speed
node using a surplus commercial radio that you got for little
ornothing.My hope is that GRAPES can licence the modem to a
company that has some RFsmarts, so that they could develop a
series of drop-in up-converter anddown-converter modules for
various bands, that can be housed in the same box.There oughta
be some economies involved in making RF modules specifically
forthe modem, versus separate transverters (relaxed LO stability
specs, etc.)IMHO, the TAPRadio will actually help the process of
acceptance of the WA4DSYmodem along, by hastening the
establishment of 9600 bps as a new standard forend users.  If it
does well, more people will accept the need for inter-nodelinks
at 56 kbs and higher, and manufacturers will see a market for
plug 'nplay products for these speeds.Let's make it happen in
1990!73, Barry VE3JF-- Barry McLarnon    Communications Research
Center    Ottawa, ON   CanadaUUCP:
...utzoo!bnr-vpa!bnr-rsc!dgbt!barry   INTERNET:
[e-mail]$erve: 71470,3651     Packet radio:
VE3JF @ VE3JF------------------------------Date: 27 Nov 89
10:39:24 GMTFrom:
gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!
[e-mail]: TAPR 9600 RAdio/Modems???>
When you're used to thinking of a modem in terms of a $5 chip in
a TNC, the> thought of spending $250 on a modem, in kit form no
less, takes a little> getting used to.But of course we know the
modem is the most important part, besides the radio.> Ditto for
spending $250 or more for a transverter, when you can put up a>
low-speed node using a surplus commercial radio that you got for
little or> nothing.But you can convert many radios to
transverters by retuning and removing mostof the I.F. strips,
right?--Phil Howard,
KA9WGN--<[e-mail]>------------------------------End
of PACKET-RADIO Digest V89 Issue
#251*****************************************27-Nov-89
17:22:23-MST,9029;000000000000Return-Path:
<[e-mail]>Date: Mon, 27 Nov
89 17:15:34 MSTFrom:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: PACKET-RADIO Digest
V89 #252To: [e-mail]-RADIO
Digest         Mon, 27 Nov 89       Volume 89 : Issue 252Today's
Topics:                         DOSGATE - Update...         How
do you calculate the frame check sequence (FCS)
Radio built into PeeCee? (2 msgs)                      TAPR 9600
RAdio/Modems???                       TNC's on broadband
LAN??------------------------------------------------------------
----------Date: 27 Nov 89 17:16:06 GMTFrom:
mirror!necntc!necis![e-mail]  (Rich Bono)Subject: DOSGATE
- Update...Here is info on the latest version of DOSGATE:    The
current version of the DOSGATE driver *should* now supportmost
any TNC.  The previous version only worked well with Kantronix
TNC's.    DOSGATE allows a PC (XT, AT, compatibles too) to be used
froma remote packet terminal.  This allows *almost* any MS-DOS
program thatis available on the disk drives to be run from the
remote packet terminal.    "*Almost* any" does not include programs
that bypass MS-DOS functioncalls for terminal I/O, or (because
of limitations of the remote packet users)programs that require
graphics, etc.    DOSGATE installs as a 'device' driver in place of
the standardANSI.SYS driver, although (at this time) is does not
support ANSI escapesequences.    DOSGATE has been tested with
Kantronix, and AEA TNC's at this time.Hopefully more will be
added to this list as users send me reports (Sorry,I can't
afford to own one of each type of TNC!).    What can DOSGATE do for
you?  Just about anything that you can thinkof, and have/write
the software for.... controlling things in your shack,allowing
access to a telephone modem, compiling programs, etc.    My DOSGATE
system (NM1D-2 on 145.070 in Derry, NH accesable throughnode
SNH) has the following applications available to users via the
packetnetwork (users include regular checkins from Canada to
Arkansas):    SeeSats - Real time OSCAR tracking    AutoExam - Online
Ham radio exams from Novice to Extra, can be           used
interactivly or to print out written exams, full           question
pools, each exam is randomly different.    AutoCall - Online
callbook database (kudos to N7IKQ), look up           any call in the
US (currenly limited by disk space to           the W1 call area,
should contain entire US by December).    Games -  Several INFOCOM
'adventure' style games that can be played         on-line.    Repeater
database - Repeaters in the New England area which can be
searched by frequency, Town, State, etc.    Club database - Local
radio club member database can be searched by             name,
call, address, town, state, etc.    DOSMAIL - SIMPLE (local only,
no autoforwading at this time) mail            system that works
similar to other packet BBS's.    Misc - Several other databases,
and programs too numerous to mention           here.    How to get
DOSGATE for your area:        There is NO COST for the DOSGATE
software if you use it for    Amateur Radio on-the-air
applications.  To get a copy send the    following to me:            1
Formatted 5 1/4 inch 360K floppy diskette            1 Self-addressed,
STAMPED diskette mailer to                allow me to return your disk to
you.            Your Name and Address            Your request for DOSGATE.        Send
to:                Rich Bono                7 Redfield Circle                Derry, NH 03038    If you
forget to include any of the above items, then your disk    will
probably not be returned to you!!!    DOSGATE is not available via
electronic transfer...     YES!!! Packet can be used for MUCH more
than just email!!!    DOSGATE allows you to easily write your own
programs and not    have to worry about the program to TNC
interface.    Support a DOSGATE in your local area........            Rich
(NM1D)    --
/****************************************************************
**********\ * Rich Bono (NM1D)    If I could only 'C' forever!!
  [e-mail] *  * [phone]          NEC
Technologies Inc.                NM1D@WB1DSW *
\****************************************************************
**********/------------------------------Date: Mon, 27 NOV 89
14:04:02 GMTFrom:
[e-mail]: How do you
calculate the frame check sequence (FCS)Can anybody please send
me notes about how to calculate the Frame CheckSequence (FCS), a
sixetten bit number calculated by both the senderand receiver of
packet frames, please.It is a cyclic redundancy check,
calculated in accordance with ISO 3309(HDLC) recommendations.
Trouble is that I don't know how to calculate it !Thanks,Olivier
Crepin-Leblond, Computer Systems & Electronics,Electrical &
Electronic Eng., King's College London,
UK.------------------------------Date: 18 Mar 90 10:19:53
GMTFrom: usna![e-mail]  (tsmith
<usna![e-mail]>)Subject: Radio built into PeeCee?Just
look at the November issue of BYTE Magazine.(page 308 or maybe
382 don't have the book with me at the moment)I called the
company and got their sales info.Interesting product till you
get to the price!!!KB3YVBill
[e-mail]------------------------------Dat
e: 27 Nov 89 18:54:32 GMTFrom:
shlump.nac.dec.com![e-mail]  (fred
k1io)Subject: Radio built into PeeCee?In article <[e-mail]>,
[e-mail] (tsmith <trw@usna>) writes...>Just look at the
November issue of BYTE Magazine.>(page 308 or maybe 382 don't
have the book with me at the moment)> >I called the company and
got their sales info.>Interesting product till you get to the
price!!!The ad is for the Megadata card, which covers 408-470
MHz.  It doesn'tinclude a price.  The Arlan card for 902-908
(Part 15, unlike Megadata which claims 15 mile range) costs
$1500.Not having the guts to call them, is Megadata higher or
lower than Arlan?Still, the idea's right, the price
isn't.------------------------------Date: 27 Nov 89 18:24:22
GMTFrom:
mailrus!wuarchive!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!caes
ar.cs.montana.edu!ogccse!emory!stiatl!rsiatl![e-mail]-sta
te.edu  (John G. De Armond)Subject: TAPR 9600 RAdio/Modems???In
article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
writes:>>>But you can convert many radios to transverters by
retuning and removing most>of the I.F. strips, right?>I wish it
were true.  The G3RUH/TAPR- type modems contain significant
DCcomponents.  The DSY modem's MSK modulation contains much less
but stillsome.  This means that the sections of the radio that
handle the modulation (the whole radio, in the case of DSY) must
be linear.  Thatmeans that Class C radios such as most all
commercial land mobile radios,won't work.  When I first heard of
Dale's work, I held high hopes thatordinary radios could be
tapped at the IF stage on receive and modulated ormixed in the
transmitter to be used.  Proved not to be the case.BUT!  There
is no reason linear transverter hardware cannot be made
availableas cheaply as most surplus gear.  After all, there is
no synthesizer and littleIF involved.  The Microwave Modules
transverter, with its all-descrete designhand-built
construction, is a very poor cost model to use for reference.I
hope that some of the RF geniuses that populate this newsgroup
willwork up a nice little transverter design in their spare time
:-)73 john-- John De Armond, WD4OQC                     |
Manual? ... What manual ?!? Radiation Systems, Inc.     Atlanta,
GA    | This is Unix, My son, You emory!rsiatl!jgd          **I
am the NRA** | just GOTTA Know!!!
------------------------------Date: Mon, 27 Nov 89 17:35
CSTFrom: [e-mail]: TNC's on
broadband LAN??Comment: Processed by UWGATEto:
[e-mail] anyone out 'there'
used/interfaced amateur packet TNC's to a broad-band LAN??  A
shared interconnect service would then be possible atspeeds up
to 9600 B, with the proper modem and rf strip..  The questionis,
would it be any cheaper to implement than other commercial
productswhich give you async point-to-point communications?  It
would be anaddressable system..  I think you'd want to make darn
sure whateveryou hung on the network was spectrally CLEAN!  I
have a non-profitapplication for such a
[e-mail] 128.104.198.10P.S.  Has
anyone done any remote control/telemetry with such equipmentover
a broadband LAN??P.P.S. Is there another forum better suited for
such a question? (I doubt it).------------------------------End
of PACKET-RADIO Digest V89 Issue
#252*****************************************28-Nov-89
11:24:54-MST,13373;000000000000Return-Path:
<[e-mail]>Date: Tue, 28 Nov
89 11:15:56 MSTFrom:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: PACKET-RADIO Digest
V89 #253To: [e-mail]-RADIO
Digest         Tue, 28 Nov 89       Volume 89 : Issue 253Today's
Topics:            Calling all KA9Q Xenix/Unix Porters/Users....
                        CSMA/CA performance?
     help with pc noise                  TAPR 9600
RAdio/Modems??? (2 msgs)                WA4DSY Technical
Information (2
msgs)------------------------------------------------------------
----------Date: 27 Nov 89 12:21:42 GMTFrom:
eds1!wa3wbu![e-mail]  (John Gayman)Subject:
Calling all KA9Q Xenix/Unix Porters/Users....In article
<[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Mark J. Bailey) writes:>
Hello,> > I am trying to build a list of those persons
developing, porting, and/or> using Phil's KA9Q package on
Unix/Xenix.  Since installing the system(s)   I am running
Phil's TCP/IP package version 890421.1 on a 16 Mhz 386 system
using Microport V/386 3.0eU. I use it for interconnecting my
Unix and Messy-DOS machine and it performs very
well.                        John-- John Gayman, WA3WBU              |
UUCP: uunet!wa3wbu!john1869 Valley Rd.                  |
   ARPA: [e-mail] Marysville, PA 17053             |
        Packet: WA3WBU @ WB3EAH
------------------------------Date: 28 Nov 89 05:04:59 GMTFrom:
jupiter.bellcore.com![e-mail]: CSMA/CA
performance?I am interested in the potential applicability of
the CSMA/CA (CarrierSense Multiple Access with Collision
Avoidance) protocol to amateurpacket radio. In particular, I am
curious about its potential in ahidden terminal
environment.CSMA/CA works like this:1. A station wishing to
transmit first executes a fairly standardp-persistence routine
that introduces a random delay.2. The station sends a short
Request to Send (RTS) packet to thedestination.3. The receiving
station returns a Clear to Send (CTS) packet to thesender.4. The
sender sends the actual data packet(s).The idea is that
collisions should happen only to the RTS packets, whichare
relatively short. If a sender doesn't get a CTS in response to
itsRTS in a specified interval, it waits for a random period and
triesagain. Stations overhearing a RTS message directed at
someone else arerequired to defer long enough for the intended
receiver to return a CTSmessage, and stations hearing CTS
packets are required to defer to thesending station until it has
finished sending its data.What makes this technique potentially
valuable for packet radio is thatit may offer another solution
to the hidden-terminal problem. Givenreasonable signal strength
reciprocity, stations that might interferewith a sender they
cannot hear would be alerted to its presence byhearing the
receiver's CTS packet. If the length of the data to be sentis
included in the RTS packet and echoed in the CTS packet,
thenstations hearing the CTS will know how long to stay off the
channel.Again assuming reciprocity, a station hearing RTS but
not CTS would nothave to defer beyond the CTS response window
since it would most likelynot interfere with the distant
receiver. This would maximize spatialreuse of the channel.You
can think of this approach as similar to Busy Tone Multiple
Access(BTMA) except that the receiver's busy "tone" (the CTS
message) istime-division-multiplexed onto the data channel as a
packet. Or, in moreconventional ham radio terms, the CTS message
means "the frequency's inuse, old man". :-)The big drawback, of
course, is the overhead of the RTS/CTS exchange. Ifa data
transmission is sufficiently long then overhead isn't a big
deal,but if the RTS/CTS exchange has to be done even for short
packets thenthe overhead could be as much as three times.
Obviously there is sometransmission size below which it would be
quicker just to send the datapacket without the RTS/CTS
handshaking and take the chance that it'llcollide. (You would
still have to defer to RTS/CTS packets from otherstations, of
course.)Has anybody done any analyses or simulations of this
protocol? I'mparticularly interested on the effect of modem
turnaround time onoverhead. If the standard CSMA/CD formulas are
any guide, it appearsthat for WA4DSY modems with turnaround
times of 15ms, the data packetsshould be larger than about 700
bytes for the resulting efficiency toexceed that of slotted
Aloha. It may turn out that this technique wouldbe practical
only for FTP/TCP/IP transfers with large window
sizes.Comments?Phil------------------------------Date: 27 Nov 89
21:06:52 GMTFrom:
cs.utexas.edu!oakhill!val![e-mail]  (Ben
Thornton)Subject: help with pc [e-mail] (Ted
Medin) writes:> Have my pc hooked up to the hf rig but notice
the pc causes noise on>the hf bands, particularly noticable on
10 m. The pc is about 7 ft from the >rig with a coax cable
between. So any suggestions on how to suppress the>pc's
radition???>73, ted>n6trf  Unfortunately, there may not be an
*easy* way to cure the problem.In trying to locate the source, I
discovered that disconnecting all ofmy external peripheral
cables (printer, RS-232, etc.) from the computerhad reduced the
interference considerably.  The keyboard and power cablesare a
major source of RFI as well.  Incidentally, this problem
existswith the computer NOT connected electrically to the HF rig
save the paththrough the house power distribution, which is
about 10 feet or so.  I have not yet operated the HF rig using
the computer for packet orRTTY/AMTOR operation but instead use a
standalone VT-101 terminal at themoment.  The terminal itself
suffers from RF ingress problems but thatis another story :-).
To try and solve the problem, I used some MFJ EMI toroids on 4
of thecables (I only bought 4 at first).  This did seem to help
by bringing theinterference level down by about 10db on the
S-meter.  However, theinstructions point out that it may take as
many as 3 or 4 PER WIRE to dothe job right.  This represents
serious erosion of the wallet consideringhow many wires I have
hanging on my machine :-).The computer is the usual metal box
with the less-than-rf-tightcover/chassis arrangement common in
PC or AT clones.  The only realmetal-to-metal contact between
the cover and the chassis is in the rearwhere the screws that
secure the cover are located.  I have not yetattempted to do so,
but I suspect that improving the lid/chassisconnectivity in the
front of the box would help a great deal.  The flyin that
ointment is the lack of RF shielding in the disk drive
openings;not a good situation from the ham perspective. -- Ben
Thornton             packet:  WD5HLS @ KB5PM   Internet:
[e-mail] Associates Labs      uucp:
...!cs.utexas.edu!val!benAustin, TX              fidonet:
1:382/40 - The Antenna Farm
BBS------------------------------Date: 28 Nov 89 03:24:17
GMTFrom: shelby!neon![e-mail]  (Marc T.
Kaufman)Subject: TAPR 9600 RAdio/Modems???In article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John G. De Armond) writes:>In
article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
writes:->But you can convert many radios to transverters by
retuning and removing most->of the I.F. strips, right?>I wish it
were true.  The G3RUH/TAPR- type modems contain significant
DC>components.  The DSY modem's MSK modulation contains much
less but still>some.  This means that the sections of the radio
that handle the >modulation (the whole radio, in the case of
DSY) must be linear...I made up a version of the DSY ROM that
has no amplitude modulation components,and that (should) work
just fine class C.  I have sent it to a few people fortesting.
It is compatible with standard DSY modems (in that both
shouldinteroperate).  If there are not too many people who want
it, I will mailcopies of a C program that generates the rom
code.Marc Kaufman
([e-mail])------------------------------Date:
28 Nov 89 03:43:02 GMTFrom: jupiter![e-mail]  (Phil R.
Karn)Subject: TAPR 9600 RAdio/Modems???In article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail] (John G. De Armond) writes:>I
wish it were true.  The G3RUH/TAPR- type modems contain
significant DC>components.  The DSY modem's MSK modulation
contains much less but still>some.  This means that the sections
of the radio that handle the >modulation (the whole radio, in
the case of DSY) must be linear.  That>means that Class C radios
such as most all commercial land mobile radios,>won't work.
When I first heard of Dale's work, I held high hopes
that>ordinary radios could be tapped at the IF stage on receive
and modulated or>mixed in the transmitter to be used.  Proved
not to be the case.I think John's a little confused here.As far
as baseband DC components go, the WA4DSY and G3RUH modem
signalslook very much alike -- both use scramblers but no other
forms ofbaseband encoding, e.g., Manchester encoding. Thanks to
the scramblers,neither modem has any discrete lines in their
baseband spectra, but theyboth still have spectral density peaks
at DC. The low frequency signalcomponents cause some "baseline
wander" if you AC couple them as in thetwo 9600 baud designs,
but a very clever "commutating slicer" in theWA4DSY modem sets a
slicing threshold that depends only on the mark andspace
voltages -- not the short term DC average.As far as the RF
envelopes go, it is true that the WA4DSY modulator wasintended
for a linear transverter/amplifier chain while the 9600
bauddesigns can work with Class C amplifiers. However, the
WA4DSY linearityrequirement is due to Dale's use of a modified
form of MSK that producesa non-constant RF envelope amplitude.
Classical MSK produces a constantenvelope signal that can be
amplified in a Class C amplifier.The WA4DSY modulator *will*
work just fine through a nonlinear amplifier,but the signal
bandwidth will increase somewhat. You can see this effectwhen
adjusting a modem on a spectrum analyzer. When you drive
aMicrowave Modules transverter beyond 10 watts average output,
thenear-in sidelobes come up noticeably on the analyzer, though
they arestill down at least 20 dB. Even with a nonlinear
amplifier, however, Isuspect the bandwidth occupied by the
WA4DSY modem is still less than aG3RUH/K9NG modem operating at
the same speed. (The coherent modulationmethod used by WA4DSY is
inherently cleaner than the noncoherentG3RUH/K9NG method.)The
precise characteristics of the WA4DSY modulator, including the
RFenvelope shape, can be changed by simply changing the waveform
tables inthe transmit encoder EPROM. Some time ago Marc Kaufman,
WB6ECE,experimented with them with the goal of minimizing the
bandwidth of aconstant-envelope signal. It's been a while since
he did this so I don'tremember his results; hopefully he can
fill us in here.Standard FM receivers *can* be used to feed
WA4DSY demodulators, as longas the IFs are compatible and the
receiver bandwidth ahead of thetap-off point can be made wide
enough. The WA4DSY demodulator's firstinternal IF is 10.7 MHz,
which is common enough. Since most FM voicereceivers place the
bulk of their selectivity at the 2nd IF (typ 455KHz), tapping
the signal is relatively straightforward.Some form of mixing (as
opposed to frequency multiplication) is stillrequired for the
modulator, though, as multiplying the MSK signal wouldmultiply
its modulation index -- it would no longer be "minimum"
shiftkeying. But low-level linear mixing is no big deal, and if
nonlinearamplifiers could be used at the higher levels the
system could be madequite
inexpensive.Phil------------------------------Date: 27 Nov 89
21:28:16 GMTFrom:
cs.utexas.edu!oakhill!val![e-mail]  (Ben
Thornton)Subject: WA4DSY Technical InformationCan somone with
access to technical information about the WA4DSY modem please
post it to the net?-- Ben Thornton             packet:  WD5HLS @
KB5PM   Internet:  [e-mail] Associates Labs      uucp:
...!cs.utexas.edu!val!benAustin, TX              fidonet:
1:382/40 - The Antenna Farm
BBS------------------------------Date: 28 Nov 89 06:53:45
GMTFrom: jupiter![e-mail]  (Phil R. Karn)Subject:
WA4DSY Technical InformationIn article
<[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Ben Thornton)
writes:>Can somone with access to technical information about
the >WA4DSY modem please post it to the net?Ben, your best bet
is to see my review in the October issue of 73Magazine.  It
contains several diagrams that help illustrate the designof the
modem that would be difficult to reproduce here (although
itmight be possible to post postscript
versions.)Phil------------------------------End of PACKET-RADIO
Digest V89 Issue
#253*****************************************29-Nov-89
14:27:01-MST,11917;000000000000Return-Path:
<[e-mail]>Date: Wed, 29 Nov
89 14:18:10 MSTFrom:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: PACKET-RADIO Digest
V89 #254To: [e-mail]-RADIO
Digest         Wed, 29 Nov 89       Volume 89 : Issue 254Today's
Topics:            Calling all KA9Q Xenix/Unix Porters/Users....
                  overcome hidden stations problem
      PACKET-RADIO Digest V89 #253                problems with
the BITNET mailing list            TCP/IP Packet Radio Address
Coordinators list                       What PID do people use
?----------------------------------------------------------------
------Date: 28 Nov 89 19:13:18 GMTFrom:
cadre.dsl.pitt.edu!pitt!speedy.cs.pitt.edu![e-mail]
 (Bob Hoffman)Subject: Calling all KA9Q Xenix/Unix
Porters/Users....Message-ID: <[e-mail]>I coordinate, or
try to coordinate, the Unix versions of the KA9QTCP/IP package.
The latest version I have assembled is availablewith anonymous
FTP to host vax.cs.pitt.edu in the filepub/ka9q/net-unix.cpio.Z.
 It is a bug-fixed version 890421.1.  Hadthere been an 890421.2,
this would have been the starting point.This version is known to
run on the following systems:    -- Vax 4.3bsd    -- Sun-3 SunOS
4.0.1, Sys V emulation    -- AT&T 3B2 Sys V rel 3.0    -- AT&T 7300 OS
version 3.5    -- Convergent Tech MiniframeI have linted this
version as much as I can to remove any potentialportability
problems and have incorporated many of the fixes suppliedby
Microport and Xenix users.  I don't have access to an 80x86
versionof Unix, so I would appreciate hearing of any problems
experiencedby people trying to compile and run this package.  My
goal is to haveone set of sources that can be compiled and run
anywhere.I also have a copy of the Unix version of NOS that was
done byAnders Klemets ([e-mail]).  I plan to make this
the basis offuture versions of the KA9Q package on
Unix.    ---Bob.--Bob Hoffman, N3CVL       {allegra, bellcore,
cadre, idis, psuvax1}!pitt!hoffmanPitt Computer Science
[e-mail]------------------------------Date: Wed, 29
Nov 89 13:52:38 MEZFrom:
[e-mail]: overcome hidden
stations problemat>>Date: 28 Nov 89 05:04:59 GMT>From:
jupiter.bellcore.com|[e-mail]>Subject: CSMA/CA
performance?>>I am interested in the potential applicability of
the CSMA/CA (Carrier>Sense Multiple Access with Collision
Avoidance) protocol to amateur>packet radio. In particular, I am
curious about its potential in a>hidden terminal
environment.>>CSMA/CA works like this:>>1. A station wishing to
transmit first executes a fairly standard>p-persistence routine
that introduces a random delay.>>2. The station sends a short
Request to Send (RTS) packet to the>destination.>>3. The
receiving station returns a Clear to Send (CTS) packet to
the>sender.after it executed another p-persistance routine
|?>>4. The sender sends the actual data packet(s).>>The idea is
that collisions should happen only to the RTS packets, which>are
relatively short. If a sender doesn't get a CTS in response to
its>RTS in a specified interval, it waits for a random period
and tries>again. Stations overhearing a RTS message directed at
someone else are>required to defer long enough for the intended
receiver to return a CTS>message, and stations hearing CTS
packets are required to defer to the>sending station until it
has finished sending its data.> ...................>You can
think of this approach as similar to Busy Tone Multiple
Access>(BTMA) except that the receiver's busy "tone" (the CTS
message) is>time-division-multiplexed onto the data channel as a
packet.>...................>Has anybody done any analyses or
simulations of this protocol? I'm>particularly interested on the
effect of modem turnaround time on>overhead. If the standard
CSMA/CD formulas are any guide, it appearsThere is in fact a big
problem of those BTMA full-duplex nodes( occupying 2 frequencies
): still dealing with p-persistance controll.p-persistance is a
nice cookie at a first view. On the other hand itadds delay, so
it reduces throuput of a channel.For example: assume a
VHF/UHF-TRX has a turnaround time( station is dead, no
receiving, no carrier available toother stations ) of about 100
msec ( which is a fairly good valuenowadays, I measured some
devices of up to 250 msec ) and a minimumsize frame of about 20
byte ( similar to RR#-frames ). This frames willtake about 150
msec ( at least ) at 1200 bps to xmit.Butif one decided to
manage channel access by means of p-persistanceand will controll
5 concurrently operating stations the slottime ofp-persitance
has to be multiples of the turn-around-time.This will bring a
statistical maximum delay of 500 msec per turn-around( in the
above example ) or an average delay of 250 msec.Which isn't a
very usable delay to xmit a 150 msec frame.When turning over to
higher data-rates this relation becomes evenworse, because
turn-around-time doesn't drop  in the sameway as the data rate
increases.So I feel a method that increases the amount of
p-persistance delaysis only one way we might go.I'd prefer
another way that reduces (p-persistance) delays to
maximizethrouput of  a channel.This could be managed  by a
centralized station by means of a DAMAmethode ( which is
described in the previous proceedings of the digitalcomitee
meeting ). DAMA won't need any additional intended delay.And an
intelligent scheduling algorithm will reduce arbitrationoverhead
to a minimum. Additionly the overhead will decrease ifchannel
load is going to increase.Detlef ( dk4eg
).------------------------------Date: Tue, 28 Nov 89 19:16
ESTFrom: "Harry E. Bates"
<[e-mail]>Subject:
PACKET-RADIO Digest V89 #253Please sign me off of this list. I
have tried n different ways to logout butnothing seems to
work!Thanks. Sorry to tie up the list with this request.Harry E.
BatesTowson State UniversityDepartment of PhysicsBaltimore, MD
21204HBATES@TOWSONVX------------------------------Date: Wed, 29
NOV 89 11:14:00 GMTFrom:
[e-mail]: problems
with the BITNET mailing listMessage-ID:
<24E094C8_00111D88.0092E8223F656EE0$[e-mail]>In the
past few days, a few people have sent some messages to the
wrongaddress. As a result, the messages get directly sent to all
peoplesubscribed on the BITNET redistribution of the list, but
doesn't getincluded in the packet-radio digest. That means that
instead of receivinga clean digest about once a day, I get many
short messages. This is irritating.So may I remind all of you
networkers, that the address to send messages to is:On INTERNET:
 [e-mail]-simtel20Regards,Olivier
Crepin-Leblond, Computer Systems & Electronics,Electrical &
Electronic Eng., King's College London,
UK.------------------------------Date: 29 Nov 89 16:33:51
GMTFrom: [e-mail]  (Brian Kantor)Subject: TCP/IP Packet
Radio Address Coordinators listMessage-ID:
<[e-mail]>            Revised 11/29/8944.002    Bob
Meyer        K6RTV    Calif: Sacramento44.004    Douglas Thom        N6OYU    Calif:
Silicon Valley - San Francisco44.006    Don Jacob        WB5EKU    Calif:
Santa Barbara/Ventura44.008    Brian Kantor        WB6CYT    Calif: San
Diego44.010    Brian Roode        KA6CCF    Calif: Orange County44.012    Mike
Horne        KA7AXD    Eastern Washington (state)44.014    John
Shalamskas        KJ9U    Hawii & Pacific Islands44.016    Don
Jacob        WB5EKU    Calif: Los Angeles - S F Valley44.018    Rod
Wertz        WC6T    Calif: San Bernardino44.020    Bill
Flynn        AI0C    Colorado: Northeast44.022    John
Stannard        KL7JL    Alaska44.024    Clifford Neuman        N1DMM    Washington:
Western (Puget Sound)44.026    Ron
Henderson        WA7TAS    Oregon44.028    Don Adkins        KD5QN    Texas:
Dallas44.030    J Gary Bender        WS5N    New Mexico44.032    Bdale
Garbee        N3EUA    Colorado (Colorado Springs)44.034    Jeff
Pierce        WD4NMQ    Tennesee44.036    Doug
Drye        KD4NC    Georgia44.038    Mike Abbott        N4QXV    South
Carolina44.040    Jeff Jacobsen        WA7MBL    Utah44.042    Phil
Akers        WA4DDE    Mississippi44.044    Rolfe
Tessem        W3VH    Massachusetts: western44.046    William
Simmons        WB0ROT    Missouri44.048    Jacques
Kubley        KA9FJS    Indiana44.050    Iowa            KC0OX    Iowa44.052    Gary
Grebus        K8LT    New Hampshire44.054    Jon
Maguire        N1CQE    Vermont44.056    Jim Posiadlo
        AE1C    Boston44.058    Rich Clemens        KB8AOB    West
Virginia44.060    Howard Leadmon        WB3FFV    Maryland44.062    Jim
Dearras        WA4ONG    Virginia (not DC)44.064    Phil Karn        KA9Q    New
Jersey: northern 44.065    Brian Riley        KA2BQE    New Jersey: southern
44.068    Norm Sternberg        W2JUP    New York: Long Island44.070    Gary
Sanders        N8EMR    Ohio44.072    Dick Gulbrandsen    WD9DBJ    Chicago -
North Ill.44.074    James Curran        KA4OJN    North Carolina44.076    Kurt
Freiberger        WB5BBW    Texas: central?44.077    Rod
Huckabay        KA5EJX    Texas: west44.078    Joe
Buswell        K5JB    Oklahoma44.080    John Gayman        WA3WBU    Pennsylvania:
eastern44.082    Seven Elwood        N7GXP    Montana44.084    Bob
Ludtke        K9MWM    Colorado: western44.088    Norm
Sternberg        W2JUP    Connecticut44.092    Dan Frank        W9NK    Wisconsin,
upper peninsula Michigan44.094    Dan
Frank        W9NK    Minnesota44.096    Brian Lloyd        WB6RQN    District of
Columbia44.098    Garry Paxinos        (waiting)    Florida44.100    Jere
Sandidge        K4FUM    Alabama44.102    Steven Corso        KV8G    Michigan (lower
peninsula)44.104    Ed Rasso        WA2FTC    Rhode Island44.106    Gary
Mitchell        WB9TPG    Kentucky44.108    James Dugal        N5KNX    Louisiana:
SW44.110    Richard Duncan        WD5B    Arkansas44.112    Bob
Hoffman        N3CVL    Pennsylvania: Pittsburgh44.116    Tom
Kloos        WA7NJK    Portland, OR44.118    Jon
Andrews        WA2YVL    Maine44.124    David Dodell        WB7TPY    Arizona##
44.128 is reserved for testing.  Do not use for operational
networks.# You may safely assume that any packets with 44.128
addresses are bogons# unless you are using them for some sort of
testing#44.128    TEST## International subnet coordinators by
country#44.129    Japan        JG1SLY Tak Kushida, JH3XCU Joly
Kanbayashi44.130    Germany        DL4TA44.131    United
Kingdom    G3MRX,G6KVK44.132    Indonesia    YB1BG    Robby
Soebiakto44.133    Spain        (no coord
yet)44.134    Italy        I2KFX44.135    Canada        VE3GYQ    David
Toth44.136    Australia    VK2ZXQ44.137    Holland        PA0GRI    Gerard Van Der
Grinten44.138    Israel        4X6OJ    Ofer
Lapid44.139    Finland        OH2BJU44.140    Sweden        SM0RGV    Anders
Klemets44.141    Norway        LA4JL    Per
Eotang44.142    Switzerland    HB9SFD44.143    Austria        OE1YSS    Irmela
Gagern44.144    Belgium        ON7LE44.145    Denmark        OZ1EUI44.146    Phillipin
es    DU1UJ    Eddie Manolo44.147    New
Zealand44.148    Ecuador        HC5K    Ted44.149    Hong
Kong    VS6EL44.150    Yugoslavia    YU3FK    Iztok
Saje44.151    France        FC1BQP    Pierre-Francois
Monet44.152    Venezuela    OA4KO/YV5    Luis
Suarez44.153    Argentina    LU7ABF    Pedro
Converso44.154    Greece        SV1IW    Manos44.155    Ireland        EI9GL    Paul
Healy44.156    Hungary        HA5DI    Markus
Bela44.157    Chile        (none)    Flavio Llanos44.193    Outer
Space-AMSAT    W3IWI        Tom Clark------------------------------Date:
Wed, 29 NOV 89 16:23:22 GMTFrom:
[e-mail]: What PID do
people use ?Message-ID:
<24E0996B_00111D88.0092E84D778FE2C0$[e-mail]>Could
anyone tell me what PID is used (Protocol Identifier) forpacket
radio ? Please tell me the bit sequence of that octet.Many
thanks,Olivier Crepin-Leblond, Computer Systems &
Electronics,Electrical & Electronic Eng., King's College London,
UK.------------------------------End of PACKET-RADIO Digest V89
Issue #254*****************************************30-Nov-89
12:23:12-MST,11396;000000000000Return-Path:
<[e-mail]>Date: Thu, 30 Nov
89 12:15:21 MSTFrom:
[e-mail]-To:
[e-mail]: PACKET-RADIO Digest
V89 #255To: [e-mail]-RADIO
Digest         Thu, 30 Nov 89       Volume 89 : Issue 255Today's
Topics:                          9600 packet modems
                 BB V2.8                          DIGICOM
CARTRIDGE                         OS/2 and packet BBS
 Re: Is Heath's HK-232 the same as a PK-232?
TAPR 9600 RAdio/Modems??? (2
msgs)------------------------------------------------------------
----------Date: 27 Nov 89 14:32:52 GMTFrom:
mitel!sce!cognos!dgbt![e-mail]  (Barry Mclarnon
DGBT/DIP)Subject: 9600 packet modemsMessage-ID:
<[e-mail]>From article <[e-mail]>, by
[e-mail] (Mark Bramwell, VE3PZR
TEL:[phone]):> Has anyone used the pac-comm 9600 baud
modems?> > I was interested in how easy it is/isn't  to hook it
up to a radio?There is an article in the latest (Dec 89) 73 Mag
which gives some detailson the interfacing requirements.
Speaking of which, does anyone else findit rather tacky that an
article about a Pac-Comm modem, written by two*employees*
(part-time, anyway) of Pac-Comm, is labelled prominently as
a"review"?Barry-- Barry McLarnon    Communications Research
Center    Ottawa, ON   CanadaUUCP:
...utzoo!bnr-vpa!bnr-rsc!dgbt!barry   INTERNET:
[e-mail]$erve: 71470,3651     Packet radio:
VE3JF @ VE3JF------------------------------Date: Wed, 29 Nov 89
18:39:23 PSTFrom: "Roy Engehausen" <[e-mail]>Subject: BB
V2.8Message-ID: <[e-mail]>Version 2.8 of the
AA4RE BB program is now available.The primary advantage of BB
over the MBL/RLI/BQE/CBBS.... systems is theability to handle
multiple connects per port.  The program uses it ownmultitasker
and no DesqView, DoubleDos, etc is required.  On the downside,
BB has been optimized for speed but requires at least 512K
(andusually 640K) to be used productively.You can get this
program by sending a $5 US (or equivalent) to: Frank McPherson
KB7TV 4102 E. Lavender Lane Phoenix, Az. 85044 (602)
759-1854N7IJI in Charlotte, NC is also distributing the
software.  Contact himat N7IJI @ N7IJI.NC.USA.NA on how to
obtain a copy.The software can also be obtained by downloading
from the following BBS:   WA6RDH BBS at 916-678-1535
(300/1200/2400/4800/9600 N81)Those with FTP Internet service or
BITNET should send a note to AA4RE @AA4RE.#NOCAL.CA.USA.NA with
your TCPIP address (eg. 123.213.22.33) orBITNET address for
delivery over those networks.The software should be available
from TAPR after 12/15.  Send orders to:TAPR - Box 12925 - Tucson
AZ - 85732New features:  -- Added new port type -- G8BPQ_NODE.
Use version 3.51 or higher     of the G8BPQ program.  -- Add
ability to execute DOS program from WAKEUP or Keyboard  -- Added
new search args for K R and EXPORT commands.  Now similar
        to the "L" command  -- Added "R" option..  LATER and
REJECT support  -- Added support for multiple BBS with same call
 -- Added White Pages support (EW command)  -- Added GN command
to change file names while running  -- Added NO_BUSY_FWD in
PARMS.BB -- It prevents a forward cycle if port is
       busy.  Intended for HF where you only want one connect.
-- Added $7, $8, $9 to MESSAGEs.  Each sounds a different tone.
This     is primarily for blind SYSOPs.In addition, the
following programs are available   BB28DOC -- N4CHV's DOC file
for BB   BBUTL12 -- KL7GNG's BB utility package including Log
File Analyzer   QBBS    -- KL7GNG's Satellite tracker server for
BBSPlease correspond directly with the authors if you have
questions,comments, or problems with these files.In addition, I
have tested N2MH's header parser and it works nice.  Thisprogram
updates your HLOOKUP.BB file based on incoming messages.Contact
him directly (N2MH @ N2MH.NY.USA.NA) for version
68.------------------------------Date: 30 Nov 89 02:26:00
GMTFrom: att!tsdiag!ka2qhd![e-mail]
(Barry)Subject: DIGICOM CARTRIDGEMessage-ID: <[e-mail]>For
those of you unfamiliar with Digicom, see my article in 73
Magazine,August 1988, or send SASE for info. 73 de Barry
W2UP------------------------------Date: Wed, 29 Nov 89 22:13
CSTFrom: <[e-mail]>Subject: OS/2
and packet BBSIs anyone out there running a packet BBS under
OS/2?  If so, whatsoftware package?  Who wrote it?  What
features does it have?73, Charles AA5AV @
W5AC.TX.USA.NA------------------------------Date: 29 Nov 89
16:59:33 GMTFrom:
zephyr.ens.tek.com!tekcrl!tekgvs![e-mail]  (Jan
Steinman)Subject: Re: Is Heath's HK-232 the same as a
PK-232?Message-ID: <[e-mail]><Heath's HK-232 TNC
looks conspicuously similar to AEA's PK-232.  Why the names have
only one difference between them.  Are they the same?>I've got
one each.  They are the same.  They will both run the latest
ROMs.  (I didn't order the mailbox upgrade -- is it worth $65?)I
like the Heath's rectangular LEDs better.  A more important
difference is that *all* the Heathkit's chips are socketed,
while only the bigger chips in the AEA box are.  The Heath
manual is somewhat better, and is three-hole bound, which I
prefer.                               Jan Steinman - N7JDB                    Tektronix Electronic
Systems Laboratory                    Box 500, MS 50-370, Beaverton, OR
97077                        (w)503/627-5881
(h)503/657-7703------------------------------Date: 30 Nov 89
01:57:29 GMTFrom:
zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!emory!st
iatl!rsiatl![e-mail]  (John G. De
Armond)Subject: TAPR 9600 RAdio/Modems???Message-ID:
<[e-mail]>In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail]
(Barry Mclarnon DGBT/DIP) writes:>>I don't find this at all
surprising, or necessarily a Bad Thing.  The>vendors no doubt
feel that the market for 56kb boxes is relatively small>compared
to, say, TNCs, and that it's not worth their while to get in
if>they have to carve it up with other vendors.  Similar
situation with the>PS-186, but that didn't stop SANDPAC from
licencing it to AEA.  But Barry, The AEA/PS186 is the best
example I've seen so far for NOT givingexclusive license!  This
mythical, magical board is becomming the biggestvaporware joke
since VisiOn!  I'm not picking on SANDPAC, I'm shootingsquarely
at AEA.I am one of the most feverent believers in source code
for software andmultiple sources for hardware.  A major reason I
keep shooting at thatmoving target called NET is because it is
non-proprietary.Consider the benefits of non-proprietary
designs.  Packet radio exists formost people today because the
TAPR folks established a hardware AND a software standard with
the TNC-x series.  And aside from plug'n'playinterchangability
between brands of TNC-2 clones, the competative pressureof the
market has kept them affordable.  Two perfect examples using the
TNC-2as a reference at a typical price of $120.00:Example A)
The heathkit pocket tnc at about $200 retail.  Here is a TNCthat
contains fewer components, uses the Z80 superintegration block
anda single chip modem, is designed for automatic construction
and yetcosts TWICE that of the TNC-2 clones.Example B) The
PK-232 at over $300.00 retail.  Here is a unit that containsonly
marginally more components than the TNC-2 and yet costs THREE
TIMESthat of the TNC-2.  And because AEA has chosen to "improve"
the command set,it is incompatable with the TNC-2 standard which
really complicates things.What really confounds me is that the
vendors want proprietary rights inthe first place.  The benefits
of ham-engineered products are many.  NRE costs are almost
non-existent.  THey are handed a fully production-engineered
product that only needs packaging and distribution.  THe
existenceof a standard with multiple sources creates a
synergistic condition thatenhances the market potential.  So why
do they have to have exclusives?I think it is the god
syndrom.I'll repeat my message of an earlier post.  If people
really want affordable, non-proprietary packet components such
as the DSY modem,then put the pressure on the vendors.  Tell
them to kill the NIH stuffand go with the proven
standards.JohnPerhaps a>compromise can be struck, such as making
the licence exclusive for only>a limited period of time, such as
a year.  Throw in a few other provisos,>e.g., that the licence
is revoked if the product doesn't materialize>within a certain
time span, and that GRAPES retains the rights to sell>modem kits
to individual experimenters.  I firmly believe that with
9.6kb>gear and fast switch hardware becoming readily available,
somebody will>wanna grab that 56kb carrot.>>> John>>Barry>>--
>Barry McLarnon    Communications Research Center    Ottawa, ON
 Canada>UUCP: ...utzoo!bnr-vpa!bnr-rsc!dgbt!barry   INTERNET:
[e-mail]>Compu$erve: 71470,3651     Packet radio:
VE3JF @ VE3JF-- John De Armond, WD4OQC                     |
Manual? ... What manual ?!? Radiation Systems, Inc.     Atlanta,
GA    | This is Unix, My son, You emory!rsiatl!jgd          **I
am the NRA** | just GOTTA Know!!!
------------------------------Date: 30 Nov 89 16:13:20 GMTFrom:
snorkelwacker!usc!cs.utexas.edu!oakhill!val![e-mail].
edu  (Ben Thornton)Subject: TAPR 9600 RAdio/Modems???Message-ID:
<[e-mail]>[e-mail] (John G. De
Armond) writes:>I'll repeat my message of an earlier post.  If
people really want >affordable, non-proprietary packet
components such as the DSY modem,>then put the pressure on the
vendors.  Tell them to kill the NIH stuff>and go with the proven
standards.>JohnI agree with you 100%. Unfortunately, the Not
Invented Here syndromepermeates most markets having to do with
computers.  However, packetradio controller vendors proved once
already that they are capable ofmeeting market demands.  I think
the inclusion of KISS mode supportin their firmware is a good
example of this.  Another good example isthe addition of mailbox
features.  (but not SMTP compatible :-( )If the vendors do
business according to the philosophies of exclusivityand NIH,
they limit the growth of their own market.  But then, thisis
common sense, isn't it?The packet controller vendors need to be
told what the marketplacewants and if the demand is there, they
will probably put aside theNIH biases.  (We want it compatible,
we want it fast, we want it NOWand we want it CHEAP.  :-) -- Ben
Thornton             packet:  WD5HLS @ KB5PM   Internet:
[e-mail] Associates Labs      uucp:
...!cs.utexas.edu!val!benAustin, TX              fidonet:
1:382/40 - The Antenna Farm BBS------------------------------End
of PACKET-RADIO Digest V89 Issue
#255*****************************************